The URL can be used to link to this page

PC20-520RESOLUTION NO. PC 20-520 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MENIFEE, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. PLN 19-0012 (TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 37668) LOCATED NORTH OF SCOTT ROAD AND EAST AND WEST OF LINDENBERGER ROAD. WHEREAS, on July 26, 2019 the applicant, MLC Holdings, Inc., filed a formal application with the City of Menifee for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. PLN 19- 0012 for the subdivision of 56.58 gross acres into 175 single-family residential lots with an average lot size of 7,228 square feet with common area lots for recreation and open space/preservation located north of Scott Road and east and west of Lindenberger Road; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study (“IS”) and Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) have been prepared to analyze and mitigate the project's potentially significant environmental impacts; and, WHEREAS, between October 1, 2020 and October 21, 2020, the twenty (20)-day public review period for the IS/MND took effect. During this time, the IS/MND, was publicly noticed by publication in a newspaper of general circulation and was noticed to owners within 300 feet of the Project site boundaries, related agencies and government agencies; and WHEREAS, no comments on the IS/MND were received during the public review period; and WHEREAS, the City has complied with CEQA and the IS/MND is an accurate and objective statement that fully complies with the CEQA Guidelines and represents the independent judgment of the City; and WHEREAS, no evidence of new significant impacts or increased severity of environmental impacts, as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, have been received by the City after circulation of the draft IS/MND which would require re- circulation. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Menifee hereby makes the following findings: 1. The Planning Commission finds on the basis of the evidence presented and the whole record before it, including the Initial Study and the draft MND a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “1”, and any comments received, that there is no substantial evidence that the project, as mitigated, will have a significant effect on the environment. 2. The Planning Commission determines that the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (“MMRP”), which is attached to the MND and incorporated into the project’s Conditions of Approval, and a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “2” and incorporated herein by reference, will assure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. 3. The Planning Commission further finds that the adoption of the MND reflects the DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Page 2 of 2 IS/MND Resolution for TR PLN 19-0012 Date: October 28, 2020 Planning Commission’s independent judgment and analysis. 4. The MND, all documents referenced in the MND, and the record of proceedings on which the Planning Commission’s decision is based are located at City of Menifee City Hall at 29844 Haun Road, Menifee, CA 92586 and the custodian of record of proceedings is the City of Menifee City Clerk. 5. The Planning Commission adopts an MND for the project including but not limited to the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) as attached to the MND and incorporated into the project’s Conditions of Approval. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28th DAY OF OCTOBER 2020. _________________________ Randy Madrid, Chairman Attest: _______________________________ Stephanie Roseen, Deputy City Clerk Approved as to form: ______________________________ Thai Phan, Assistant City Attorney DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. PLN19-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 1 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 CITY OF MENIFEE CEQA Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project title: Tentative Tract Map No. PLN 19-0012 (TTM 37668) 2. Lead agency name and address: City of Menifee, Community Development Department, 29844 Haun Road, Menifee, CA 92586. 3. Contact person and phone number: Ryan Fowler, Senior Planner, 951.672.6777 4. Project location: The project is located north of Scott Road and west and east of Lindenberger Road. The project site is located in the City of Menifee, County of Riverside, State of California. A. Total Project Area: 56.58 gross acres B. Assessor’s Parcel No: 372-190-001, 372-190-003, 372-160-006, 372-160-007, 372-160-008, 372-160-013 C. Section 13, Township 6S & Range 3W of the San Bernardino Base and Meridian. D. Longitude: 33.643247 Latitude: -117.146531 5. Project Applicant/Owners: MLC Holdings, Inc. Matt Maehara 5 Peters Canyon Road, Suite 310 Irvine, CA 92606 6. General Plan Designation: 2.1-5 du/ac Residential (2.1-5 R) 7. Zoning: LDR-2 (Low Density Residential-2) (7,200 sq. ft.) 8. Description of Project: Tentative Tract Map No. 37668 (Planning Application No. PLN 19-0012) proposes a subdivision of approximately 56.58 acres gross acres into 175 single-family residential lots ranging in size from 4,835 to 12,480 square feet (sf) (with an average lot size of 7,228 sf). The subdivision also creates twenty-eight lettered lots allocated for open space/water quality (9.73 acres), open space/entry monuments (0.07 acres), and riparian/vernal pool preservation (2.36 acres). The proposal also includes recreational amenities consisting of a passive walking trail and 0.21-acre pocket park with tot lot. Landscaping The site would contain approximately 467,810 sf of landscaping to be maintained by the Citywide Community Facilities District (CFD) (including pocket park, right-of-way-adjacent, and detention basin landscaping) and 164,174 sf of landscaping to be maintained by the Homeowner Association (HOA) (excluding homeowner lots). All planting and irrigation would conform with the City of Menifee Municipal Code. Construction Construction of the project is expected to occur from 2021 through 2026, with site preparation, grading, paving, building construction and architectural coating occurring during that time period. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. PLN19-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 2 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Access and Circulation Primary access to the site is provided via Lindenberger Road and Eagle Road with the residential lots located along the westerly boundary of the project having a secondary access provided via Pitman Lane. All streets within this subdivision are proposed to be public and all open space lots are proposed to be maintained by the City Community Facilities District (CFD). The project will include approximately 15.25 acres of dedicated right-of-way for public streets. Infrastructure and Utilities Onsite infrastructure will include five (5) water quality bio-retention basins distributed throughout the project site. Existing drainage patterns will be maintained in the proposed condition. One hundred (100)-year flows will be kept at pre-development flow rates. All lots and public streets will be graded to allow runoff to drain towards a designated street or area drain, leading to the proposed storm drain infrastructure. There is one public maintained 30-inch RCP storm drain line located on Scott Road that is proposed to transport overflow from the project site. The project is also proposed to overflow off-site during heavy storm events, which occurring under existing conditions. The northern four (4) water quality basins will have small sump pumps, placed below ground, to drain the remaining runoff that is left in the water quality basin subdrain systems. Off-site flows from the proposed street improvements within the intersections of Scott Road and Lindenberger Road are proposed to be treated by Modular Wetland (MWS) bio-infiltration systems. 9. Project Site Background. Based on aerial photos of the project site, the site remains undeveloped and fallow with annual grasses throughout with biological sensitive areas consisting of riparian habitat, wetlands and vernal pools situated within the northerly portion of the proposed subdivision located west of Lindenberger Road and east of Pitman Lane. The project site is bound by vacant and fallow land to the north, single-family residential subdivision (TR 29259) to the east, Scott Road to the south and a church and single-family residential subdivision (TR 29409) to the west. Surrounding Land Uses and Environmental Setting: The project site is located on the north side of Scott Road with parcels on both the east and west sides of Lindenberger Road. The site is generally flat and currently undeveloped. Vegetation consists of grass, weeds, trees, and/or shrubs. The area surrounding the project site is primarily residential and rural in nature. Residential development surrounds the property on the east, south and west side. Residential properties south of the project site include single-family dwellings with a portion of the lots being larger plots of land. Properties to the north include vacant land. The table below provides the adjacent General Plan Area Plan(s), Land Use Designation(s), Zoning(s), and existing land uses for the project area and its immediate surroundings. Table 1 Surrounding Land Uses Direction General Plan Designation Zoning District Existing Land Use Project Site 2.1-5 du/ac Residential (2.1-5 R) LDR-2 (Low Density Residential) Vacant (Undeveloped) North Rural Residential (RR2) Rural Residential (RR2) Partly Vacant, Single Family Residential w/ Light Agriculture South Rural Residential (RR2) & City of Murrieta Medium Density Residential (MDR) Rural Residential (RR2) & City of Murrieta Rural Residential (RR) Scott Road, Single Family Residential DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. PLN19-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 3 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 East 2.1-5 du/ac Residential (2.1-5 R) LDR-1 (Low Density Residential) Single Family Residential West 2.1-5 du/ac Residential (2.1-5 R) & PF (Public/Quasi Public Facilities) LDR-1 (Low Density Residential) & PF (Public/Quasi Public Facilities) Single Family Residential, Revival Christian Fellowship Church DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. PLN19-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 4 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): Based on the current Project design concept, other permits necessary to realize the proposal will likely include, but are not limited to, the following. • Stormwater management and associated permitting will be required consistent with the provisions of the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. • Permitting required under the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) pursuant to requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. PLN19-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 5 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Figure 1: Project Regional Location DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. PLN19-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 6 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Figure 2: Project Location Longitude: 33.643247 Latitude: -117.146531 DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 7 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Figure 3: Site Plan DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 8 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 9 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Figure 4: Landscape Plan DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 10 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below (x) would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Greenhouse Gas Emissions Population and Housing Agriculture Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Public Services Air Quality Hydrology/Water Quality Recreation Biological Resources Land Use/Planning Transportation Cultural Resources Mineral Resources Tribal Cultural Resources Energy Geology/Soils Noise Utilities and Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance The environmental factors checked below (x) would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Greenhouse Gas Emissions Population and Housing Agriculture Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Public Services Air Quality Hydrology/Water Quality Recreation Biological Resources Land Use/Planning Transportation Cultural Resources Mineral Resources Tribal Cultural Resources Energy Geology/Soils Noise Utilities and Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance The environmental factors checked below (x) would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Less than Significant” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Greenhouse Gas Emissions Population and Housing Agriculture Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Public Services Air Quality Hydrology/Water Quality Recreation Biological Resources Land Use/Planning Transportation Cultural Resources Mineral Resources Tribal Cultural Resources Energy Geology/Soils Noise Utilities and Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance The environmental factors checked below (x) would have “No Impact” by this project as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Greenhouse Gas Emissions Population and Housing Agriculture Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Public Services Air Quality Hydrology/Water Quality Recreation Biological Resources Land Use/Planning Transportation Cultural Resources Mineral Resources Tribal Cultural Resources Energy Geology/Soils Noise Utilities and Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 11 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation:  I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.  I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.  I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.  I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.  I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature Date Printed Name For Cheryl Kitzerow Community Development Director DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 12 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from "Earlier Analyses," as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 13 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 ISSUES: I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? X c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from a publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? X d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? X Sources: Menifee General Plan Exhibit C-8, “Scenic Highways”, and Exhibit CD-2, “Enhanced Landscape Corridors and Scenic Corridors”; Riverside County General Plan Figure 5, “Mt. Palomar Nighttime Lighting Policy”; State of California, Department of Transportation, California State Scenic Highway Mapping System; Ordinance No. 655 (Regulating Light Pollution); City of Menifee Ordinance 2009-24 (Dark Sky) Applicable General Plan Policies: Policy C-6.4: Incorporate riding, hiking, and bicycle trails and other compatible public recreational facilities within scenic corridors. Policy C-6.5: Ensure that the design and appearance of new landscaping, structures, equipment, signs, or grading within eligible county scenic highway corridors are compatible with the surrounding scenic setting or environment. Goal CD-3: Projects, developments, and public spaces that visually enhance the character of the community and are appropriately buffered from dissimilar land uses so that differences in type and intensity do not conflict. Policy CD-3.3: Minimize visual impacts of public and private facilities and support structures through sensitive site design and construction. This includes, but is not limited to: appropriate placement of facilities; undergrounding, where possible; and aesthetic design (e.g., cell tower stealthing). Policy CD-3.8: Design retention/detention basins to be visually attractive and well integrated with any associated project and with adjacent land uses. Policy CD-3.9: Utilize Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) techniques and defensible space design concepts to enhance community safety. Policy CD-3.10: Employ design strategies and building materials that evoke a sense of quality and DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 14 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 permanence. Policy CD-3.12: Utilize differing but complementary forms of architectural styles and designs that incorporate representative characteristics of a given area. Policy CD-3.13: Utilize architectural design features (e.g., windows, columns, offset roof planes, etc.) to vertically and horizontally articulate elevations in the front and rear of residential buildings. Policy CD-3.14: Provide variations in color, texture, materials, articulation, and architectural treatments. Avoid long expanses of blank, monotonous walls or fences. Policy CD-3.15: Require property owners to maintain structures and landscaping to high standards of design, health, and safety. Policy CD-3.17: Encourage the use of creative landscape design to create visual interest and reduce conflicts between different land uses. Policy CD-3.19: Design walls and fences that are well integrated in style with adjacent structures and terrain and utilize landscaping and vegetation materials to soften their appearance. Policy CD-3.20: Avoid the blocking of public views by solid walls. Goal CD-4: Recognize, preserve, and enhance the aesthetic value of the City's enhanced landscape corridors and scenic corridors. Policy CD-4.2: Design new and, when necessary, retrofit existing streets to improve walkability, bicycling, and transit integration; strengthen connectivity; and enhance community identity through improvements to the public right-of-way such as sidewalks, street trees, parkways, curbs, street lighting, and street furniture. Policy CD-4.3: Apply special paving at major intersections and crosswalks along enhanced corridors to create a visual focal point and slow traffic speeds. Policy CD-4.4: Frame views along streets through the use of wide parkways and median landscaping. Policy CD-4.7: Design new landscaping, structures, equipment, signs, or grading within the scenic corridors for compatibility with the surrounding scenic setting or environment. Policy CD-4.8: Preserve and enhance view corridors by undergrounding and/or screening new or relocated electric or communication distribution lines, which would be visible from the City's scenic highway corridors. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: a): Less than Significant Impact. Scenic vistas can be impacted by development in two ways. First, a structure may be constructed that blocks the view of a vista. Second, the vista itself may be altered (i.e., development on a scenic hillside). The natural mountainous setting of the Menifee area is critical to its overall visual character and provides scenic vistas for the community. Topography and a lack of dense vegetation or urban development offer scenic views throughout the City, including to and from hillside areas. Scenic features include gently sloping alluvial fans, rugged mountains and steep slopes, mountain peaks and ridges, rounded hills with boulder outcrops, farmland and open space. Scenic vistas provide views of these features from public spaces. Many of the scenic resources are outside the City limits and beyond the planning area boundary. Scenic views from Menifee include the San Jacinto Mountains to the northeast and east; the San DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 15 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Bernardino Mountains to the north; the San Gabriel Mountains to the northwest; and the Santa Ana Mountains to the west and southwest. The project site has views of the surrounding mountains, which are partially obstructed from the surrounding development. The project site is a relatively flat, vacant lot consisting of naturally vegetated grasses with riparian areas and vernal pools in the northern portion of the site. The site is surrounded by vacant, fallow land to the north, single-family residences to the east, Scott Road to the south, and a church and residential subdivision to the west. The proposed residential subdivision would allow for the development of 175 single-family homes, internal public-access streets, recreational trails, a tot lot playground, and passive open spaces. Existing riparian and vernal pools would be preserved as open space. The homes would not exceed 30 feet in height. The height of the homes would be consistent with existing single-family residential subdivisions adjacent to the site to the east and west. Views of the San Jacinto Mountains to the east and San Gabriel and Santa Ana Mountains to the west are partially obstructed by existing residential subdivisions. The project is not in the vicinity of an officially designated or eligible state scenic highway as identified by the California Scenic Highway Mapping System or within or adjacent to a scenic vista. According to the City of Menifee’s General Plan Community Design Element, Exhibit CD-2 “Enhanced Landscape Corridors and Scenic Corridors”, the City has determined that Menifee Road, Scott Road, and Briggs Road are Enhanced Landscape Corridors. The project site is located adjacent to Scott Road and is approximately 2,600 feet east of Menifee Road and 2,600 feet west of Briggs Road. According to the City’s Community Design Element, roadways designated Enhanced Landscape Corridors should receive special landscaping treatment to create a unique sense of identity and provide visual interest along high-volume roadways. Techniques such as planting consistent street trees, installing colored or stamped pavement at intersections, using special light fixtures, or hanging banners are the types of treatments Enhanced Landscape Corridors should receive. Accordingly, the project architecture and landscaping have been designed to enhance the area. Further, the proposed project will be subject to City Design Guidelines which regulate the height and bulk of the building. Therefore, impacts to scenic vistas would be less than significant. b): No Impact. As discussed above, the project site is not located within or adjacent to a designated state scenic highway, as identified by the California Department of Transportation. There are no officially designated State Scenic Highways within the City. State Route 74 (SR 74), which is located approximately seven miles north of the project site, is eligible for listing as a state scenic highway; however, the proposed project is not visible from this highway and would have no impact to scenic resources within SR 74. In general, the project would not damage scenic resources, including rock outcroppings and historic buildings. There would be no impacts to scenic resources within a state scenic highway. c): Less than Significant. Development of the project could result in a significant impact if it resulted in substantial degradation of the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Degradation of visual character or quality is defined by substantial changes to the existing site appearance through construction of structures such that they are poorly designed or conflict with the site’s existing surroundings. Construction of the proposed project will result in short-term impacts to the existing visual character and quality of the area. Construction activities will require the use of equipment and storage of materials within the project site. However, construction activities are temporary and will not result in any permanent visual impact. Upon project completion, the proposed project will consist of 175 single-family homes, internal public-access streets, recreational trails, a playground, and passive open spaces. Existing riparian and vernal pools would be preserved as open space. The project will also include landscaping improvements. The project will be subject to review by City staff to ensure consistency with City Design Guidelines and Zoning Code. All buildings will be consistent with City design and building height requirements and limitations. The proposed project will change the visual character of the project site by adding structures and landscaping to a vacant site; however, the development will be consistent with existing single-family residential subdivisions adjacent to the east, south, and west of the project site. The project will retain sensitive natural areas in the northern DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 16 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 portion of the site and will incorporate recreation trails and open spaces that will be available for public use, thereby preserving elements of natural landscaping and open space. With incorporation of the specified design features and compliance with City regulations, the project will have less than significant impacts on the visual character of the site and its surroundings. d): Less than Significant. Excessive or inappropriately directed lighting can adversely impact nighttime views by reducing the ability to see the night sky and stars. Glare can be caused from unshielded or misdirected lighting sources. Reflective surfaces (i.e., polished metal) can also cause glare. Impacts associated with glare range from simple nuisance to potentially dangerous situations (i.e., if glare is directed into the eyes of motorists). There are lighting sources adjacent to this site, including free-standing street lights, light fixtures on buildings, vehicle headlights, and traffic lights. The proposed project will include outdoor lighting associated with on-site safety and security. Lighting associated with the project would not be directed towards the adjacent land uses. The proposed lighting will be in character and work in conjunction with existing surrounding uses. Chapter 6.01 of the Menifee Municipal Code (Dark Sky; Light Pollution) indicates that low-pressure sodium lamps are the preferred illuminating source and that all non-exempt outdoor light fixtures shall be shielded. A maximum of 8,100 total lumens per acre or per parcel if less than one acre shall be allowed. When lighting is “allowed”, it must be fully shielded if feasible and partially shielded in all other cases, and must be focused to minimize spill light into the night sky and onto adjacent properties (Section 6.01.040). The project will be conditioned that, prior to the issuance of building permits, all new construction which introduces light sources be required to have shielding or other light pollution limiting characteristics such as hood or lumen restrictions. The City of Menifee General Plan Community Design Element includes goals that encourage attractive landscaping, lighting, and signage that conveys a positive image of the community (CD-6) and that limit light leakage and spillage that may interfere with the operations of the Palomar Observatory (Goal CD6.5). Lighting proposed by the project would comply with Menifee Municipal Code Section 6.01 and General Plan goals. Accordingly, the project will have a less than significant impact on interfering with the nighttime use of the Mt. Palomar Observatory. Sources of daytime glare are typically concentrated in commercial areas and are often associated with retail uses. Glare results from development and associated parking areas that contain reflective materials such as glass, highly polished surfaces, and expanses of pavement. The project does not contain commercial uses or exposed metal or excessive amounts of glass for windows. Exterior paint colors and materials will also be non-reflective. Given the minimal use of glare-inducing materials in the design of the proposed buildings for the project, reflective glare impacts will be less than significant. Conditions of Approval: COA 1 - Lighting. Prior to the issuance of building permits, all outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for Plan Check approval and shall comply with the requirements of the City of Menifee Municipal Code Chapter 6.01. Mitigation Measures: None DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 17 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? X b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? X c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)); timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526); or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?? X d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? X e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? X Sources: State of California, Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program; Menifee General Plan Exhibit OSC-5, “Agricultural Resources” Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal OSC-6: High value agricultural lands available for long-term agricultural production in limited areas of the City. Policy OSC-6.1: Protect both existing farms and sensitive uses around them as agricultural acres transition to more developed land uses. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 18 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: a): No Impact. The proposed project is located on vacant land in a primarily residential area. The map of Important Farmland in California (2012) prepared by the Department of Conservation does not identify the proposed project site as being Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, of Farmland of Local Importance. While the site is designed as Farmland of Local Importance in the City of Menifee General Plan (Exhibit OSC-5), the project site is designated for residential uses in the City’s General Plan (Menifee 2013). Therefore, the project would have no impact on converting agricultural resources. b): No Impact. Williamson Act Contracts are not active for the proposed project site. The project site is zoned Low Density Residential 2 (LDR-2). Therefore, there will be no conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act Contract. No impact will occur. c-d): No Impact. Public Resources Code Section 12220(g) identifies forest land as land that can support 10- percent native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits. The project site and surrounding properties are not currently being managed or used for forest land as identified in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g). The project site is vacant and minimally naturally vegetated; thus, there will be no loss or conversion of forestland. The project site is zoned Low Density Residential 2 (LDR-2) and is not zoned for forest land or timberland. Therefore, development of this project will have no impact to any timberland zoning. e): No Impact. The proposed project is located on a vacant site and is designated for residential development. The site is not currently being used for agriculture. Development of this project will not change the existing environment in a manner that will result in the conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural land or forest land to non-forest land. Therefore, no impact will occur. Conditions of Approval: None Mitigation Measures: None DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 19 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 III. AIR QUALITY -- Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? X b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? X c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? X d) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? X Sources: South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 1993; Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon), Lindenberger Subdivision Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study (2020) (Appendix A) Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal OSC-9: Reduced impacts to air quality at the local level by minimizing pollution and particulate matter. Policy OSC-9.1: Meet state and federal clean air standards by minimizing particulate matter emissions from construction activities. Policy OSC-9.2: Buffer sensitive land uses, such as residences, schools, care facilities, and recreation areas from major air pollutant emission sources, including freeways, manufacturing, hazardous materials storage, wastewater treatment, and similar uses. Policy OSC-9.3: Comply with regional, state, and federal standards and programs for control of all airborne pollutants and noxious odors, regardless of source. Policy OSC-9.5: Comply with the mandatory requirements of Title 24 Part 11 of the California Building Standards Code (CALGreen) and Title 24 Part 6 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. Regulatory Requirements: Regulatory requirements are existing requirements and reasonably anticipated standard conditions that are based on local, state, or federal regulations and laws that are frequently required independently of environmental review and serve to offset or prevent specific impacts. Regulatory requirements are not included as mitigation measures since the project is required to comply with the requirements through state and local regulations. Demolition, Grading, and Construction Activities: Compliance with Provisions of SCAQMD Rule 403 Rule 403 includes the following provisions: DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 20 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 • All unpaved demolition and construction areas shall be wetted at least twice daily during excavation and construction, and temporary dust covers shall be used to reduce dust emissions and meet SCAQMD Rule 403. • The construction area shall be kept sufficiently dampened to control dust caused by grading and hauling, and at all times provide reasonable control of dust caused by wind. • All clearing, earth moving, or excavation activities shall be discontinued during periods of high winds (i.e., greater than 15 mph), so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust. • All dirt/soil shall be secured by trimming, watering, or other appropriate means to prevent spillage and dust. • All dirt/soil materials transported off-site shall be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. • General contractors shall maintain and operate construction equipment so as to minimize exhaust emissions. • Trucks having no current hauling activity shall not idle but be turned off. • Exposed unpaved surfaces shall be maintained at a minimum soil moisture of 12 percent and vehicle speeds shall be limited to 15 miles per hour on unpaved roads. Engine Idling In accordance with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations, the idling of all diesel- fueled commercial vehicles (weighing over 10,000 pounds) during construction shall be limited to five minutes at any location. Emission Standards In accordance with Section 93115 of Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations, operation of any stationary, diesel-fueled, compression-ignition engines shall meet specified fuel and fuel additive requirements and emission standards. Architectural Coatings SCAQMD Rule 1113 limits the volatile organic compound (VOC) content of architectural coatings. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: a): Less than Significant. A project may be inconsistent with the AQMP if it would generate population, housing, or employment growth exceeding forecasts used in the development of the AQMP. The 2016 AQMP, the most recent AQMP adopted by the SCAQMD, incorporates local city general plans and the SCAG’s 2016 RTP/SCS socioeconomic forecast projections of regional population, housing, and employment growth. The population growth forecasts in SCAG’s 2016 RTP/SCS for Menifee estimate that the population would increase from 81,600 in 2012 to 121,100 in 2040, for a population increase of 39,500. The increase in population from the project, estimated by CalEEMod at 515 persons, would be within the SCAG’s projected 2040 population increase of 39,500 and the project would not cause Menifee’s population to exceed official regional population projections. The proposed project also is consistent with the City’s General Plan land use designation. The household growth forecasts in SCAG’s 2016 RTP/SCS for Menifee estimate that the number of households would increase from 28,400 in 2012 to 48,100 in 2040, for a household increase of 19,700. The DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 21 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 increase in housing from the project of 175 single-family residences would be within the SCAG’s project 2040 household increase of 19,700 and the project would not cause Menifee’s households to exceed official regional household projections. In addition, the AQMP provides strategies and measures to reach attainment with the thresholds for 8-hour and 1-hour ozone and PM2.5. As shown in Table 2 and Table 3 below, the project would not generate criteria pollutant emissions that would exceed SCAQMD thresholds for ozone precursors (ROG and NOX) and PM2.5. Since the project’s population and housing would be within SCAG 2016 forecasts, the project would be consistent with the AQMP and impacts would be less than significant. b): Less than Significant. A project may have a significant impact if project-related emissions exceed federal, state, or regional standards or thresholds, or if project-related emissions substantially contribute to existing or project air quality violations. The proposed project is located within the South Coast Air Basin, where efforts to attain state and federal air quality standards are governed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Both the state of California (state) and the federal government have established health-based ambient air quality standards (AAQS) for seven air pollutants (known as “criteria pollutants”). These pollutants include ozone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), inhalable particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less (PM10), fine particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5), and lead (Pb). The state has also established AAQS for additional pollutants. The AAQS are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace within a reasonable margin of safety. Where the state and federal standards differ, California AAQS are more stringent than the national AAQS. Air pollution levels are measured at monitoring stations located throughout the air basin. Areas that are in nonattainment with respect to federal or state AAQS are required to prepare plans and implement measures that will bring the region into attainment. The SCAB is in non-attainment for the federal standards for ozone and PM2.5. Areas of the SCAB located in Los Angeles County are also in nonattainment for lead (SCAQMD 2016). The SCAB is designated unclassifiable or in attainment for all other federal and state standards. Criteria pollutant and GHG emissions for project construction and operation were calculated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2016.3.2. CalEEMod is a statewide land use emissions computer model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental professionals to quantify potential criteria pollutant and GHG emissions associated with both construction and operations from a variety of land use projects. The model was developed for the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) in collaboration with the California air districts. CalEEMod allows for the use of default data (e.g., emission factors, trip lengths, meteorology, source inventory) provided by the various California air districts to account for local requirements and conditions, and/or user-defined inputs. The model calculates criteria pollutant emissions of CO, PM10, PM2.5, SO2, the ozone precursors, ROG and NOX, and GHGs emissions of CO2, N2O, and CH4, reported as CO2e. The calculation methodology and input data used in CalEEMod can be found in the CalEEMod User’s Guide Appendices A, D, and E (CAPCOA 2017). The input data and subsequent construction and operation emission estimates for the proposed project are discussed below. CalEEMod output files for the project are included in Appendix A to this report. Construction Emissions Construction activities associated with the Project would result in emissions of NOx, VOC, PM10, PM2.5, SOx, and CO. The main emissions source for construction activity are the NOx and CO combustion emissions resulting from construction equipment and PM10 dust from site preparation and grading activities. Construction emissions would be from site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, architectural coating, and construction worker commutes. Compliance with the applicable SCAQMD rules discussed above were assumed for the air quality calculations. Table 2 summarizes the estimated maximum daily emissions (lbs) of pollutants associated with DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 22 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 construction of the proposed project. As shown below, ROG, NOX, CO, SO2, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions would not exceed SCAQMD regional thresholds or LSTs. Because the project would not exceed SCAQMD’s regional construction thresholds or LSTs, project construction would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of a criteria pollutant, and impacts would be less than significant. Table 2 Project Construction Emissions Maximum Emissions (lbs/day) ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Construction Year 2021 4 47 32 <1 10 6 Construction Year 2022 2 18 19 <1 2 1 Construction Year 2023 2 16 19 <1 2 1 Construction Year 2024 2 15 18 <1 2 1 Construction Year 2025 2 14 18 <1 1 1 Construction Year 2026 27 9 15 <1 1 <1 Maximum Emissions 27 47 32 <1 10 6 SCAQMD Regional Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No Maximum On-site Emissions 27 41 31 <1 10 6 SCAQMD Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) N/A 270 1,577 N/A 13 8 Threshold Exceeded? N/A No No N/A No No Notes: See Appendix A for modeling results. Some numbers may not add up precisely due to rounding considerations. Maximum on-site emissions are the highest emissions that would occur on the project site from on-site sources, such as heavy construction equipment and architectural coatings, and excludes off-site emissions from sources such as construction worker vehicle trips and haul truck trips. Operational Emissions Operational activities associated with the proposed Project would result in emissions of NOx, VOC, PM10, PM2.5, SOx, and CO. Table 3 summarizes the project’s operational emissions by emission source (area, energy, mobile, and generator). As shown below, the emissions generated by operation of the proposed project would not exceed SCAQMD regional thresholds for criteria pollutants. Therefore, the project would not contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. In addition, because criteria pollutant emissions and regional thresholds are cumulative in nature, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants. Table 3 Project Operational Emissions Maximum Daily Emissions (lbs/day) Emission Source ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Area 12 1 59 <1 7 7 Energy <1 1 1 <1 <1 <1 Mobile 2 11 30 <1 13 4 Generator <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 Project Emissions 15 13 98 <1 20 11 SCAQMD Regional Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No Notes: See Appendix A for modeling results. Some numbers may not add up precisely due to rounding considerations. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 23 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Cumulative short-term, construction-related emissions and long-term, operational emissions from the project would not contribute considerably to any potential cumulative air quality impact because short-term construction and long-term operational emissions would not exceed any SCAQMD daily threshold. As is required of the proposed project, other concurrent construction projects and operations in the region would be required to implement standard air quality regulations and mitigation pursuant to State CEQA requirements. Such measures include compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, which requires daily watering to limit dust and particulate matter emissions. The emission levels would not conflict or obstruct the implementation of the AQMP or applicable portions of the SIP. Impacts would be less than significant. c): Less than Significant. CARB and the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) have identified the following groups of individuals as the most likely to be affected by air pollution: the elderly over 65, children under 14, infants (including in utero in the third trimester of pregnancy), and persons with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis (CARB 2005, OEHHA 2015). Some land uses are considered more sensitive to air pollution than others due to the types of population groups or activities involved and are referred to as sensitive receptors. Examples of these sensitive receptors are residences, schools, hospitals, religious facilities, and daycare centers. The closest sensitive receptors include single-family residences located immediately east and west of the project site. As noted above, the project’s construction and operational emissions are below the significance criteria for all pollutants. Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) LSTs were devised in response to concern regarding exposure of individuals to criteria pollutants in local communities. LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that will not cause or contribute to an air quality exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard at the nearest sensitive receptor, taking into consideration ambient concentrations in each source receptor area (SRA), project size and distance to the sensitive receptor. However, LSTs only apply to emissions within a fixed stationary location, including idling emissions during both project construction and operation. LSTs have been developed for NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. The SCAQMD provides LST lookup tables for project sites that measure one, two, or five acres. Project construction would disturb an area of approximately 56 acres; therefore, this analysis utilizes the five-acre LSTs. It is conservative to use the LST for a smaller construction area because it is assuming more of the project’s emissions are clustered into a tighter area than would be anticipated in real world conditions. LSTs are provided for receptors at 82 to 1,640 feet from the project disturbance boundary to the sensitive receptors. Construction activity would occur approximately 25 feet west and east of the closest sensitive receptor, which are single-family residential properties. According to the SCAQMD’s publication, Final LST Methodology, projects with boundaries located closer than 82 feet to the nearest receptor should use the LSTs for receptors located at 82 feet. Therefore, the analysis below uses the LST values for 82 feet. In addition, the project is in SRA-24 (Perris Valley). LSTs for construction in SRA-24 on a 5-acre site with a receptor 82 feet away are shown in Table 2. As indicated in Table 2, the Project would not exceed the applicable LST thresholds for the nearest sensitive receptor and impacts would be less than significant. CO “Hot Spot” Analysis A carbon monoxide (CO) hotspot is a localized concentration of CO that is above a CO ambient air quality standard. Localized CO hotspots can occur at intersections with heavy peak hour traffic. Specifically, hotspots can be created at intersections where traffic levels are sufficiently high such that the local CO concentration exceeds the federal one-hour standard of 35.0 ppm or the federal and state eight-hour standard of 9.0 ppm (CARB 2016). A detailed CO analysis was conducted during the preparation of SCAQMD’s 2003 AQMP. The locations selected for microscale modeling in the 2003 AQMP included high average daily traffic (ADT) intersections in DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 24 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 the SCAB, those which would be expected to experience the highest CO concentrations. The highest CO concentration observed was at the intersection of Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue on the west side of Los Angeles near the I-405 Freeway. The concentration of CO at this intersection was 4.6 ppm, which is well below the state and federal standards. The Wilshire Boulevard/Veteran Avenue intersection has an ADT of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day. According to the project’s Traffic Study Report (STC Traffic 2020), the total ADT for Scott Road between the Lindenberger Road and Menifee Road intersections without the project is 19,578 vehicles. With the proposed project, ADT on this segment would be 20,677 vehicles, which is much less than the 100,000-vehicle count on the Wilshire Boulevard/Veteran Avenue intersection that experiences CO concentrations well within federal and state standards. Furthermore, due to stricter vehicle emissions standards in newer cars and new technology that increases fuel economy, CO emission factors under future land use conditions would be lower than those under existing conditions. Thus, even though there would be more vehicle trips under the proposed project than under existing conditions, project-generated local mobile-source CO emissions would not result in or substantially contribute to concentrations that exceed the one-hour or eight-hour CO standard. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. TAC Related Health Risks Construction-related activities would result in short-term, project-generated emissions of diesel particulate matter (DPM) exhaust emissions from off-road, heavy-duty diesel equipment for site preparation grading, building construction, and other construction activities. DPM was identified as a toxic air contaminant (TAC) by CARB in 1998. The potential cancer risk from the inhalation of DPM (discussed in the following paragraphs) outweighs the potential non-cancer health impacts (CARB 2017a). Generation of DPM from construction projects typically occurs in a single area for a short period. Construction of the proposed project would occur over approximately five years. The dose to which the receptors are exposed is the primary factor used to determine health risk. Dose is a function of the concentration of a substance or substances in the environment and the extent of exposure that person has with the substance. Dose is positively correlated with time, meaning that a longer exposure period would result in a higher exposure level for the Maximally Exposed Individual. The risks estimated for a Maximally Exposed Individual are higher if a fixed exposure occurs over a longer period of time. According to the OEHHA, health risk assessments, which determine the exposure of sensitive receptors to toxic emissions, should be based on a 30-year exposure period (assumed to be the approximate time that a person spends in a household). OEHHA recommends this risk be bracketed with 9-year and 70-year exposure periods. Health risk assessments should be limited to the period/duration of activities associated with the project. The maximum PM2.5 emissions, which is used to represent DPM emissions for this analysis, would occur during site preparation and grading activities. While site preparation and grading emissions represent the worst-case condition, such activities would only occur for about five months, less than 10 percent of the overall construction period and less than five percent, one percent, and 0.5 percent of the typical health risk calculation period of 9 years, 30 years, and 70 years, respectively. PM2.5 emissions would decrease for the remaining construction period because construction activities such as building construction and paving would require less construction equipment. Therefore, given the aforementioned, DPM generated by project construction is not expected to create conditions where the probability that the Maximally Exposed Individual would contract cancer is greater than 10 in one million or to generate ground-level concentrations of noncarcinogenic TACs that exceed a Hazard Index greater than one for the Maximally Exposed Individual. This impact would be less than significant. d): Less than Significant. For construction activities, odors would be short-term in nature and are subject to SCAQMD Rule 402 Nuisance (CARB 2018). Construction activities would be temporary and transitory and associated odors would cease upon construction completion. Accordingly, the proposed project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people during construction, and short-term DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 25 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 impacts would be less than significant. Common sources of operational odor complaints include sewage treatment plants, landfills, recycling facilities, and agricultural uses. The project would not include any of these uses that are known to generate odors. In addition, solid waste generated by the proposed on-site uses would be collected by a contracted waste hauler, ensuring that odors resulting from on-site waste would be managed and collected in a manner to prevent the proliferation of odors. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact on operational odors. Conditions of Approval: AQ-1 (Fugitive Dust Control) The permittee shall implement fugitive dust control measures in accordance with Southern California Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 403. The permittee shall include in construction contracts the control measures required under Rule 403 at the time of development, including the following: a. Use watering to control dust generation during demolition of structures or break-up of pavement. The construction area and vicinity (500-foot radius) must be swept (preferably with water weepers) and watered at least twice daily. Site wetting must occur often enough to maintain a ten (10) percent surface soil moisture content throughout all earth moving activities. All unpaved demolition and construction areas shall be wetted at least twice daily during excavation and construction, and temporary dust covers shall be used to reduce dust emissions and meet SCAQMD District Rule 403. Wetting could reduce fugitive dust by as much as fifty percent (50%). b. Water active grading/excavation sites and unpaved surfaces at least three (3) times daily; c. All paved roads, parking and staging areas must be watered at least once every two (2) hours of active operations; d. Site access points must be swept/washed within thirty (30) minutes of visible dirt deposition; e. Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved parking areas and staging areas; f. Onsite stockpiles of debris, dirt or rusty material must be covered or watered at least twice daily; g. Cover stockpiles with tarps or apply non-toxic chemical soil binders; h. All haul trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose materials must either be covered or maintain two feet of freeboard; i. All inactive disturbed surface areas must be watered on a daily basis when there is evidence of wind drive fugitive dust; j. Install wind breaks at the windward sides of construction areas; k. Operations on any unpaved surfaces must be suspended when winds exceed twenty-five (25) mph; l. Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds (instantaneous gusts) exceed fifteen (15) miles per hour over a thirty (30) minute period or more, so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust; m. All haul trucks must have a capacity of no less than twelve and three-quarter (12.75) cubic yards; n. All loads shall be secured by trimming, watering or other appropriate means to prevent spillage and dust; DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 26 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 o. Traffic speeds on unpaved roads must be limited to fifteen (15) miles per hour; p. Provide daily clean-up of mud and dirt carried onto paved streets from the site; q. Install wheel washers for all exiting trucks, or wash off the tires or tracks of all trucks and equipment leaving the site; r. All materials transported off-site shall be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amount of dust; s. Operations on any unpaved surfaces must be suspended during first and second stage smog alerts; and, t. An information sign shall be posted at the entrance to each construction site that identifies the permitted construction hours and provides a telephone number to call and receive information about the construction project or to report complaints regarding excessive fugitive dust generation. Any reasonable complaints shall be rectified within twenty-four (24) hours of their receipt. Mitigation Measures: None DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 27 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? X b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? X c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? X d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? X e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? X f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? X Sources: Menifee General Plan; Riverside County Transportation and Land Management Agency, Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), Approved June 7, 2003; Glen Lukos Associates, Inc. (GLA) Biological Technical Report 2020 (Appendix B); Glen Lukos Associates, Inc. (GLA) Jurisdictional Delineation 2020 (Appendix C) Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal OSC-8: Protected biological resources, especially sensitive and special status wildlife species and their natural habitats. Policy OSC-8.1: Work to implement the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan in coordination with the Regional Conservation Authority. Policy OSC-8.2: Support local and regional efforts to evaluate, acquire, and protect natural habitats for sensitive, threatened, and endangered species occurring in and around the City. Policy OSC-8.4: Identify and inventory existing natural resources in the City of Menifee. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 28 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Policy OSC-8.5: Recognize the impacts new development will have on the City's natural resources and identify ways to reduce these impacts. Policy OSC-8.8: Implement and follow MSHCP goals and policies when making discretionary actions pursuant to Section 13 of the Implementing Agreement. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: a): Less than significant. The project site contains 1.81 acre of emergent freshwater marsh, 0.34 acres of Southern Riparian Scrub, and 0.25 acres of vernal pool, with the remainder of the site disturbed land. The project site is located within the Sun City/Menifee Area Plan of the MSHCP but is not located within an MSHCP Criteria Cell. The project site is located within the Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area (NEPSSA) and the Burrowing Owl Survey Area but is not located in the Criteria Area Plant Species Survey Area (CAPSSA), the Mammal or Amphibian Survey Areas, or Core and Linkage areas. Since the project site is not located within the MSHCP CAPSSA; as such, focused plant surveys for CAPSSA target species are not required pursuant to the MSHCP. However, the project is located within NEPSSA, which identifies the following target species: Munz’s onion (Allium munzii), San Diego ambrosia (Ambrosia pumila), many- stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulis), spreading navarretia (Navarretia fossalis), California Orcutt grass (Orcuttia californica), and Wright’s trichocoronis (Trichocoronis wrightii var. wrightii). Pursuant to the MSHCP, focused surveys are required for NEPSSA target species where suitable habitat is present. The project site supports approximately 0.34 acre of southern riparian scrub in the northwestern drainage feature. In addition, the site also supports emergent freshwater marsh and a 0.25-acre vernal pool that is located at the northern site boundary, both of which are considered special-status as wetland communities. The Project will not impact any special-status vegetation communities, as the project will avoid the emergent freshwater marsh, southern riparian scrub, and the vernal pool and will maintain the existing hydrology of the area. One special-status plant (little mousetail, Myosurus minimus ssp. apus), which is listed by California Native Plant Society as a California Rare Plant Rank 3 (eligible for state listing), was detected within the onsite vernal pool during focused plant surveys. The vernal pool and marsh areas were evaluated for other special- status species, including California Orcutt grass (Orcuttia californica), Campbell’s liverwort (Geothallus tuberosus), Coulter’s goldfields (Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri), mud nama (Nama stenocarpum), Parish’s brittlescale (Atriplex parishii), smooth tarplant (Centromadia pungens ssp. laevis), spreading navarretia (Navarretia fossalis), San Diego ambrosia (Ambrosia pumila), and Wright’s trichocoronis (Trichocoronis wrightii var. wrightii); however, these species were confirmed absent through focused surveys. The little mousetail is designated by the MSHCP as a Criteria Area Plant Species, but since the project site is not located within the MSHCP Criteria Area, MSHCP species-specific requirements pertaining to little mousetail do not apply to the Project. However, since the mousetail individuals are associated with a vernal pool, then the mousetail is subject to the MSHCP riparian/riverine and vernal pool policies. The proposed project will not impact special-status plants. The project has been designed to avoid the vernal pool and its watershed and maintain the existing hydrology of the area, which supports the little mousetail population. Thus, development of the proposed project will not affect the little mousetail population. The proposed project will remove habitat with the potential to support several special-status animal species, including foraging habitat for the loggerhead shrike, northern harrier, and whitetailed kite, and general use habitat for small mammals such as San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit and Stephens’ kangaroo rat. The loss of habitat for the loggerhead shrike, northern harrier, white-tailed kite, and San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit would be less than significant without mitigation due to the relatively small size of the Project site and degraded habitat. Furthermore, these species are designated as MSHCP Covered Species, and therefore the loss of habitat is covered with MSHCP participation and compliance. Impacts to Stephens’ kangaroo rat (SKR) are covered pursuant to the SKR Habitat Conservation Plan (SKR HCP), as described in Standard Condition BIO-1. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 29 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 No burrowing owls were detected at the project site during focused surveys, or within the 500-foot buffer area. The site supports numerous fossorial mammal burrows within a potential for use by burrowing owls; however, no burrowing owls were observed at any burrows, and no diagnostic sign (e.g., pellets, prey remains, whitewash, feathers, bones, and/or decoration) in order to identify potentially occupied burrows. Since no burrowing owls were detected at the site, there is no requirement pursuant to the MSHCP for the project to further address burrowing owls at this time. However, due to the presence of suitable habitat and the potential for future owl use, preconstruction surveys will be required prior to grading or other project related disturbances in order to avoid direct impacts to burrowing owls through relocation efforts. A pre- construction burrowing owl survey will be conducted pursuant to MSHCP compliance, as described in Standard Condition BIO-2. Therefore, the project would not conflict with MSHCP provisions related to burrowing owls. The project site provides suitable foraging habitat for a number of raptor species, including special-status raptors, but lacks potential nesting habitat (e.g., mature trees, shrubs). Many of the raptors that would be expected to forage and nest within western Riverside County, including those with a potential to occur at the project site, are fully covered species under the MSHCP with the MSHCP providing the necessary conservation of both foraging and nesting habitats. Some common raptor species (e.g., American kestrel and Red-tailed Hawk) are not covered by the MSHCP but are expected to be conserved with implementation of the Plan due to the parallel habitat needs with those raptors covered under the Plan. The project site also contains trees, shrubs, and ground cover that provide suitable habitat for nesting native birds. Mortality of native birds (including eggs) is prohibited under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code. The project does have the potential to impact active bird nests if vegetation is removed during the nesting season (February 1 to August 31). This impact would be less than significant with implementation of Standard Condition BIO-4 b-c): No Impact. The project site contains approximately 2.15 acres of MSHCP riparian/riverine areas associated with the drainage feature located in the northwestern portion of the project site. In addition, the project site contains the 0.26-acre vernal pool, which meets the definition of a MSHCP vernal pool. The drainage feature and the vernal pool have been determined to be jurisdictional waters subject to regulation by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). As such, the drainage and vernal pool is also subject to the jurisdiction of the Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA. The riparian habitat present is under CDFW jurisdiction. A total of 740 linear feet of streambed is present. The vernal pool is isolated and does not exhibit a bed, bank, and channel, and as such is not regulated by the CDFW under Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code. The project has been designed to avoid all jurisdictional waters at the project site and all project features will be constructed outside of the sensitive areas. The post-project hydrology has been designed to closely match the pre-project conditions, such that the project will not impact biological functions associated with adjacent and downstream aquatic resources. Because all of these aforementioned features are being avoided through development of the proposed project, and because post-project hydrology would be closely matched to pre-project development conditions, development of the proposed project would have no impacts on these features. d): No Impact. According to the MSHCP Consistency Analysis, the project site can be utilized by wildlife for local movement, but the site does not represent an important regional habitat linkage. The MSHCP does not identify the project site as occurring within a designated Existing Linkage or Proposed Linkage. The project site has the potential for wildlife to breed, including for bird nesting and for use by small mammals and reptiles. However, this use would not constitute a nursery site. e): No Impact. With implementation of Standard Condition BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-3 and BIO-4, the project would result in a less than significant impact to species covered under the MSHCP, which is the local policy protecting biological resources, as discussed in as described in Sections IV.a through IV.d. A variety of tree species are located within the riparian habitat; however, as discussed the riparian habitat is being avoided DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 30 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 resulting in compliance with City of Menifee Ordinance No. 2015-167, which requires preservation of existing mature trees. Therefore, the project will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. f): Less than significant. The project site is located within the Western Riverside County MSHCP. Through compliance with the applicable requirements, the project will not conflict with the provisions of the MSHCP, as described in Sections IV.a through IV.d. The proposed Project is consistent with all applicable sections of the MSHCP. Adherence to Standard Conditions BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-3 and BIO-4 will ensure consistency with the MSHCP. Thus, the proposed project will not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Therefore, impacts are less than significant with adherence to standard conditions of approval. Conditions of Approval: BIO-1: SKR Fees. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall pay the SKR Fee (established to provide mitigation for impacts to the SKR from projects within the SKR Fee area). BIO-2: MSHCP Fees. Prior to the release of the final occupancy permit, the project applicant shall pay the applicable MSHCP Fee in accordance with the Riverside County Multiple Habitat Species Plan. BIO-3: Pursuant to Objective 6 and Objective 7 of the Species Account for the Burrowing Owl included in the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, within 30 days prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a pre-construction presence/absence survey for the burrowing owl shall be conducted by a qualified biologist and the results of this presence/absence survey shall be provided in writing to the City of Menifee Community Development Department. If it is determined that the project site is occupied by the Burrowing Owl, take of "active" nests shall be avoided pursuant to the MSHCP and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. However, when the Burrowing Owl is present, relocation outside of the nesting season (March 1 through August 31) by a qualified biologist shall be required. The City Biologist shall be consulted to determine appropriate type of relocation (active or passive) and translocation sites. Occupation of this species on the project site may result in the need to revise grading plans so that take of "active" nests is avoided or alternatively, a grading permit may be issued once the species has been actively relocated. If the grading permit is not obtained within 30 days of the survey a new survey shall be required. No ground disturbance, including disking, blading, grubbing or any similar activity shall occur within the site until the burrowing owl study is reviewed and approved. BIO-4: To avoid impacting nesting birds, one of the following must be implemented: Conduct grading activities from September 16th through January 31st, when birds are not likely to be nesting on the site; OR Conduct pre-construction surveys for nesting birds if construction is to take place during the nesting season (February 1st through September 15th). A qualified wildlife biologist shall conduct a pre- construction nest survey no more than 14 days prior to initiation of grading to provide confirmation of the presence or absence of active nests on or immediately adjacent to the project site. If active nests are encountered, species-specific measures shall be prepared by a qualified biologist and implemented to prevent abandonment of the active nest. At a minimum, grading in the vicinity of the nest shall be deferred until the young birds have fledged. A minimum exclusion buffer of 100 feet shall be maintained during construction, depending on the species and location. The perimeter of the nest- DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 31 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 setback zone shall be fenced or adequately demarcated with staked flagging at 20-foot intervals, and construction personnel and activities restricted from the area. A survey report by the qualified biologist verifying that (1) no active nests are present, or (2) that the young have fledged, shall be submitted to the City prior to initiation of grading in the nest-setback zone. The qualified biologist shall serve as a construction monitor during those periods when construction activities occur near active nest areas to ensure that no inadvertent impacts on these nests occur. A report of the findings prepared by a qualified biologist shall be submitted to the City prior to ground disturbance and/or issuance of a grading permit. Mitigation Measures: None DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 32 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5? X b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? X c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? X Sources: Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment: Scott Road and Lindenberger Road Residential Project, prepared by FirstCarbon Solutions (Appendix C) Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal OSC-5: Archaeological, historical, and cultural resources that are protected and integrated into the City's built environment. Policy OSC-5.1: Preserve and protect significant archeological, historic, and cultural sites, places, districts, structures, landforms, objects and native burial sites, and other features, such as Ringing Rock and Grandmother Oak, consistent with state law. Policy OSC-5.3: Preserve sacred sites identified by the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians and Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, such as tribal burial grounds, by avoiding activities that would negatively impact the sites. Policy OSC-5.5: Establish clear and responsible practices to identify, evaluate, and protect previously unknown archeological, historic, and cultural sites, following CEQA and NEPA procedure. Please note that this Section primarily addresses historical, archaeological and cultural resources not associated with tribal cultural resources. For a comprehensive discussion on tribal cultural resources, please refer to Section 18, Tribal Cultural Resources, of this Initial Study. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: a): No impact. Also please see analysis in Section XVIII, Tribal Cultural Resources. According to Public Resources Code (PRC) §5020.1(j), “‘historical resource’ includes, but is not limited to, any object, building, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which is historically or archaeologically significant, or is significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California.” More specifically, CEQA guidelines state that the term “historical resources” applies to any such resources listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, included in a local register of historical resources, or determined to be historically significant by the lead agency (Title 14 CCR §15064.5(a)(1)-(3)). Regarding the proper criteria for the evaluation of historical significance, CEQA guidelines mandate that “generally a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be ‘historically significant’ if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources” DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 33 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 (Title 14 CCR §15064.5(a)(3)). A resource may be listed in the California Register if it meets any of the following criteria: 1. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage. 2. Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past. 3. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values. 4. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. (PRC §5024.1(c)) The proposed Project site does not satisfy any of the criteria for a historic resource defined in Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines. With the exception of agricultural fields, historical sources consulted for the Phase I CRA show no notable man-made features in or near the Project area from 1938 to present day. While the site appears to have been graded to some extent, aerial images show that it was not used for any purpose until agricultural fields in 1978. No impacts will occur. b): Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Also please see analysis in Section XVIII, Tribal Cultural Resources. FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS) completed a Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment (Phase I CRA) for the proposed project. The Phase I CRA included a records search and pedestrian survey. According to Eastern Information Center (EIC), University of California, Riverside records, various portions of the Project area have been included in a number of previous cultural resources surveys. The records search identified 25 cultural resources studies that have been conducted within the 0.5-mile search radius of the project. Four of the studies included a small portion of the project area. The records search conducted by the EIC indicated that the project area had not been previously surveyed in its entirety. Thirteen cultural resources have been recorded within the 0.5-mile search radius, one of which is recorded on the property: a prehistoric bedrock milling site that was first located in 2004 (Archaeological Site P-33-013299 CA-RIV- 007400). During the pedestrian survey of the project site, the previously recorded milling site was located as well as five isolated occurrences of prehistoric artifacts. The isolated artifacts are not significant by definition and are not eligible for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). Archaeological Site P-33- 013299 CA-RIV-007400 has not been evaluated for CRHR eligibility. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-8 would preserve the milling site by creating a Preservation Area around the site; therefore, the project would avoid impacts to the potential cultural resource. However, discovery of archeological materials may be uncovered during ground-disturbing activities, in which case may require implementation of Condition of Approval CUL-2. Furthermore, General Plan policies are in place to preserve and protect archaeological and historic resources and cultural sites, places, districts, structures, landforms, objects and native burial sites, traditional cultural landscapes and other features, consistent with state law and any laws, regulations or policies which may be adopted by the City (OCS-5.1). The Project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5. With implementation of Conditions of Approval CUL-1 through CUL-7 and Mitigation Measure CUL-8 impacts will be less than significant. c): Less than significant. Also please see analysis in Section XVIII, Tribal Cultural Resources. The project site has been previously disturbed, and no human remains, or cemeteries, are anticipated to be disturbed by the proposed Project. However, these findings do not preclude the existence of previously unknown human remains located below the ground surface, which may be encountered during construction excavations associated with the proposed Project. It is also possible to encounter buried human remains during DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 34 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 construction given the proven prehistoric occupation of the region, the identification of multiple surface archaeological resources within 0.5-mile of the Project site, and the favorable natural conditions that would have attracted prehistoric inhabitants to the area. With implementation of Conditions of Approval CUL-3 through CUL-4, impacts will be less than significant. Conditions of Approval: CUL-1 (Environmentally Sensitive Resources) All environmentally sensitive resources, as defined by the Native American Tribes, that are uncovered during all Project ground-disturbing activities will be undertaken with final dispositions carried out as follows: 1. Cultural Resources Disposition. In the event that Native American cultural resources are discovered during the course of grading (inadvertent discoveries), the following procedures shall be carried out for final disposition of the discoveries: a) One or more of the following treatments, in order of preference, shall be employed with the tribes. Evidence of such shall be provided to the City of Menifee Community Development Department: i. Preservation-In-Place of the cultural resources, if feasible. Preservation in place means avoiding the resources, leaving them in the place where they were found with no development affecting the integrity of the resources. ii. Reburial of the resources on the Project property. The measures for reburial shall include, at least, the following: Measures and provisions to protect the future reburial area from any future impacts in perpetuity. Reburial shall not occur until all legally required cataloging and basic recordation have been completed, with an exception that sacred items, burial goods and Native American human remains are excluded. Any reburial process shall be culturally appropriate. Listing of contents and location of the reburial shall be included in the confidential Phase IV report. The Phase IV Report shall be filed with the City under a confidential cover and not subject to Public Records Request. iii. If preservation in place or reburial is not feasible then the resources shall be curated in a culturally appropriate manner at a Riverside County curation facility that meets State Resources Department Office of Historic Preservation Guidelines for the Curation of Archaeological Resources ensuring access and use pursuant to the Guidelines. The collection and associated records shall be transferred, including title, and are to be accompanied by payment of the fees necessary for permanent curation. Evidence of curation in the form of a letter from the curation facility stating that subject archaeological materials have been received and that all fees have been paid, shall be provided by the landowner to the City. There shall be no destructive or invasive testing on sacred items, burial goods and Native American human remains. Results concerning finds of any inadvertent discoveries shall be included in the Phase IV monitoring report. CUL-2 (Inadvertent Archeological Find) If during ground disturbance activities, unique cultural resources are discovered that were not assessed by the archaeological report(s) and/or environmental assessment conducted prior to project approval, the following procedures shall be followed. Unique cultural resources are defined, for this condition only, as being multiple artifacts in close association with each other, but may include fewer artifacts if the area of the find is determined to be of significance due to its sacred or cultural importance as determined in consultation with the Native American Tribe(s). i. All ground disturbance activities within 100 feet of the discovered cultural resources shall be halted until a meeting is convened between the developer, the archaeologist, the tribal representative(s) and DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 35 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 the Community Development Director to discuss the significance of the find. ii. At the meeting, the significance of the discoveries shall be discussed and after consultation with the tribal representative(s) and the archaeologist, a decision shall be made, with the concurrence of the Community Development Director, as to the appropriate mitigation (documentation, recovery, avoidance, etc.) for the cultural resources. iii. Grading of further ground disturbance shall not resume within the area of the discovery until an agreement has been reached by all parties as to the appropriate mitigation. Work shall be allowed to continue outside of the buffer area and will be monitored by additional Tribal monitors if needed. iv. Treatment and avoidance of the newly discovered resources shall be consistent with the Cultural Resources Management Plan and Monitoring Agreements entered into with the appropriate tribes. This may include avoidance of the cultural resources through project design, in-place preservation of cultural resources located in native soils and/or re-burial on the Project property so they are not subject to further disturbance in perpetuity as identified in Non-Disclosure of Reburial Condition. v. If the find is determined to be significant and avoidance of the site has not been achieved, a Phase III data recovery plan shall be prepared by the project archeologist, in consultation with the Tribe, and shall be submitted to the City for their review and approval prior to implementation of the said plan. vi. Pursuant to Calif. Pub. Res. Code § 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred method of preservation for archaeological resources and cultural resources. If the landowner and the Tribe(s) cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for the archaeological or cultural resources, these issues will be presented to the City Community Development Director for decision. The City Community Development Director shall make the determination based on the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act with respect to archaeological resources, recommendations of the project archeologist and shall take into account the cultural and religious principles and practices of the Tribe. Notwithstanding any other rights available under the law, the decision of the City Community Development Director shall be appealable to the City Planning Commission and/or City Council. CUL-3 (Human Remains) If human remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to Public Resource Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. If the Riverside County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission shall be contacted within the period specified by law (24 hours). Subsequently, the Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the "most likely descendant." The most likely descendant shall then make recommendations and engage in consultation concerning the treatment of the remains as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. CUL-4 (Non-Disclosure of Location Reburials) It is understood by all parties that unless otherwise required by law, the site of any reburial of Native American human remains or associated grave goods shall not be disclosed and shall not be governed by public disclosure requirements of the California Public Records Act. The Coroner, pursuant to the specific exemption set forth in California Government Code 6254 (r)., parties, and Lead Agencies, will be asked to withhold public disclosure information related to such reburial, pursuant to the specific exemption set forth in California Government Code 6254 (r). CUL-5 (Archeologist Retained) Prior to issuance of a grading permit the project applicant shall retain a Riverside County qualified archaeologist to monitor all ground disturbing activities in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources. The Project Archaeologist and the Tribal monitor(s) shall manage and oversee monitoring for all initial ground disturbing activities and excavation of each portion of the project site including clearing, grubbing, tree removals, mass or rough grading, trenching, stockpiling of materials, rock crushing, structure demolition and DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 36 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 etc. The Project Archaeologist and the Tribal monitor(s), shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt the ground disturbance activities to allow identification, evaluation, and potential recovery of cultural resources in coordination with any required special interest or tribal monitors. The developer/permit holder shall submit a fully executed copy of the contract to the Community Development Department to ensure compliance with this condition of approval. Upon verification, the Community Development Department shall clear this condition. In addition, the Project Archaeologist, in consultation with the Consulting Tribe(s), the contractor, and the City, shall develop a Cultural Resources Management Plan (CRMP) in consultation pursuant to the definition in AB52 to address the details, timing and responsibility of all archaeological and cultural activities that will occur on the project site. A consulting tribe is defined as a tribe that initiated the AB 52 tribal consultation process for the Project, has not opted out of the AB52 consultation process, and has completed AB 52 consultation with the City as provided for in Cal Pub Res Code Section 21080.3.2(b)(1) of AB52. Details in the Plan shall include: a) Project grading and development scheduling; b) The Project archeologist and the Consulting Tribes(s) shall attend the pre-grading meeting with the City, the construction manager and any contractors and will conduct a mandatory Cultural Resources Worker Sensitivity Training to those in attendance. The Training will include a brief review of the cultural sensitivity of the Project and the surrounding area; what resources could potentially be identified during earthmoving activities; the requirements of the monitoring program; the protocols that apply in the event inadvertent discoveries of cultural resources are identified, including who to contact and appropriate avoidance measures until the find(s) can be properly evaluated; and any other appropriate protocols. All new construction personnel that will conduct earthwork or grading activities that begin work on the Project following the initial Training must take the Cultural Sensitivity Training prior to beginning work and the Project archaeologist and Consulting Tribe(s) shall make themselves available to provide the training on an as-needed basis; c) The protocols and stipulations that the contractor, City, Consulting Tribe(s) and Project archaeologist will follow in the event of inadvertent cultural resources discoveries, including any newly discovered cultural resource deposits that shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation. CUL-6 (Native American Monitoring [Pechanga]). Tribal monitor(s) shall be required on-site during all ground-disturbing activities, including grading, stockpiling of materials, engineered fill, rock crushing, etc. The land divider/permit holder shall retain a qualified tribal monitor(s) from the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall submit a copy of a signed contract between the above-mentioned Tribe and the land divider/permit holder for the monitoring of the project to the Community Development Department and to the Engineering Department. The Tribal Monitor(s) shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt the ground-disturbance activities to allow recovery of cultural resources, in coordination with the Project Archaeologist. CUL-7 (Native American Monitoring [Soboba]). Tribal monitor(s) shall be required on-site during all ground- disturbing activities, including grading, stockpiling of materials, engineered fill, rock crushing, etc. The land divider/permit holder shall retain a qualified tribal monitor(s) from the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall submit a copy of a signed contract between the above- mentioned Tribe and the land divider/permit holder for the monitoring of the project to the Community Development Department and to the Engineering Department. The Native American Monitor(s) shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt the ground-disturbance activities to allow recovery of cultural resources, in coordination with the Project Archaeologist. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 37 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Mitigation Measures: CUL-8 (Archeological Work) Prior to any grading in the associated area, the Project Applicant shall meet with the project archaeologist and the Consulting Tribe(s) in order to assess Archaeological Site P-33-013299 CA- RIV-007400 to determine boundaries of the site and to determine location for the ESA fencing during the grading activities for site protection. The Consulting Tribe(s) shall work with the Project archaeologist, Project Applicant, the Community Development Director and the grading contractor or appropriate personnel to ensure that a reasonable effort is made to preserve the Archeological Site and inadvertently found features safely to an open space area (anticipated to be on the northwest portion of the project site) and to discuss the most-appropriate methods of relocation. VI. Energy -- Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy, or wasteful use of energy resources, during project construction or operation? X b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? X Sources: Menifee General Plan, Menifee Municipal Code, 2019 California Green Building Standards Code, Rincon Consultants, Inc. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study (Appendix A) Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal OSC-4: Efficient and environmentally appropriate use and management of energy and mineral resources to ensure their availability for future generations. Policy OCS-4.1: Apply energy efficiency and conservation practices in land use, transportation demand management, and subdivision and building design. Goal OSC-10: An environmentally aware community that is responsive to changing climate conditions and actively seeks to reduce local greenhouse gas emissions. Policy OCS-10.4: Consider impacts to climate change as a factor in evaluation of policies, strategies, and projects Goal LU-3: A full range of public utilities and related services that provide for the immediate and long- term needs of the community. Policy LU-3.4: Require that approval of new development be contingent upon the project's ability to DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 38 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 secure appropriate infrastructure services. Background: Electricity and Natural Gas In 2018, California used 285,488 gigawatt-hours (GWh) of electricity, of which 31 percent were from renewable resources (California Energy Commission [CEC] 2019a). California also consumed approximately 22,223.8 million U.S. therms (MMthm) of natural gas in 2018 (U.S. Energy Information Administration [EIA] 2019). The project site would be provided electricity by Southern California Edison (SCE) and natural gas by Southern California Gas Company (SCG). Table 4 and Table 5 show the electricity and natural gas consumption by sector and total for SCE and SCG. In 2018, SCE provided approximately 29.9 percent of the total electricity used in California (CEC 2020a). Also, in 2018, SCG provided approximately 23.2 percent of the total natural gas usage in California (CEC 2020b). Table 4 Electricity Consumption in the SCE Service Area in 2018 Agriculture and Water Pump Commercial Building Commercial Other Industry Mining and Construction Residential Streetlight Total Usage 2,975.4 31,573.8 4,367.4 13,391.6 2,390.0 29,865.0 496.0 85,276.0 Notes: Usage expressed in GWh Source: CEC 2020a Table 5 Natural Gas Consumption in SCG Service Area in 2018 Agriculture and Water Pump Commercial Building Commercial Other Industry Mining and Construction Residential Total Usage 77.6 913.0 74.5 1,714.5 229.2 2,147.4 5,156.1 Notes: All usage expressed in MMThm Source: CEC 2020b Petroleum In 2016, approximately 40 percent of the state’s energy consumption was used for transportation activities (EIA 2018). Californians presently consume over 19 billion gallons of motor vehicle fuels per year (CEC 2018a). Though California’s population and economy are expected to grow, gasoline demand is projected to decline from roughly 15.8 billion gallons in 2017 to between 12.3 billion and 12.7 billion gallons in 2030, a 20 percent to 22 percent reduction. This decline comes in response to both increasing vehicle electrification and higher fuel economy for new gasoline vehicles (CEC 2018a). Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: a): Less than Significant. Construction During project construction, energy would be consumed in the form of petroleum-based fuels used to power off-road construction vehicles and equipment on the project site, construction worker travel to and from the project site, and vehicles used to deliver materials to the site. The project would require site preparation and DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 39 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 grading, including hauling material off-site; pavement and asphalt installation; building construction; architectural coating; and landscaping and hardscaping. The total consumption of gasoline and diesel fuel during project construction was estimated using the assumptions and factors from CalEEMod used to estimate construction air emissions in the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emission Report (Appendix A). Table 6 presents the estimated construction phase energy consumption, indicating construction equipment, vendor trips, and worker trips would consume approximately 271,027 gallons of fuel over the project construction period. Construction equipment would consume an estimated 204,095 gallons of fuel; vendor and hauling trips would consume approximately 19,665 gallons of fuel; and worker trips would consume approximately 47,267 gallons of fuel over the combined phases of project construction. Table 6 Estimated Fuel Consumption during Construction Fuel Type Gallons of Fuel MMBtu4 Diesel Fuel (Construction Equipment)1 204,095 26,015 Diesel Fuel (Hauling & Vendor Trips)2 19,665 2,507 Other Petroleum Fuel (Worker Trips)3 47,267 5,189 Total 271,027 33,711 1 Fuel demand rate for construction equipment is derived from the total hours of operation, the equipment’s horse power, the equipment’s load factor, and the equipment’s fuel usage per horse power per hour of operation, which are all taken from CalEEMod outputs (see Appendix A), and from compression-ignition engine brake-specific fuel consumptions factors for engines between 0 to 100 horsepower and greater than 100 horsepower (U.S. EPA 2018). Fuel consumed for all construction equipment is assumed to be diesel fuel. 2 Fuel demand rate for hauling and vendor trips (cut material imports) is derived from hauling and vendor trip number, hauling and vendor trip length, and hauling and vendor vehicle class from “Trips and VMT” Table contained in Section 3.0, Construction Detail, of the CalEEMod results (see Appendix A). The fuel economy for hauling and vendor trip vehicles is derived from the United States Department of Transportation (DOT 2018). Fuel consumed for all hauling trucks is assumed to be diesel fuel. 3 The fuel economy for worker trip vehicles is derived from the U.S. Department of Transportation National Transportation Statistics (24 mpg) (DOT 2018). Fuel consumed for all worker trips is assumed to be gasoline fuel. 4 CaRFG CA-GREET 2.0 fuel specification of 109,786 Btu/gallon used to identify conversion rate for fuel energy consumption for worker trips specified above (CARB 2015). Low-sulfur Diesel CA-GREET 2.0 fuel specification of 127,464 Btu/gallon used to identify conversion rate for fuel energy consumption for construction equipment specified above (CARB 2015). Due to rounding, numbers may not add up precisely to the totals indicated. The construction energy estimates represent a conservative estimate because the construction equipment used in each phase of construction was assumed to be operating every day of construction. Construction equipment would be maintained to all applicable standards, and construction activity and associated fuel consumption and energy use would be temporary and typical for construction sites. It is also reasonable to assume contractors would avoid wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary fuel consumption during construction to reduce construction costs. Therefore, the project would not involve the inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary use of energy during construction, and the construction-phase impact related to energy consumption would be less than significant. Operation The operation of the project would increase area energy demand from greater electricity, natural gas, and gasoline consumption at a currently undeveloped site. Natural gas and electricity would be used for heating and cooling systems, lighting, appliances, water use, and the overall operation of the single-family residences. Gasoline consumption would be attributed to homeowners accessing the site. The estimated number of average daily trips associated with the project is used to determine the energy consumption associated with fuel use from the operation of the project. The majority of the fuel consumption DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 40 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 would be from motor vehicles traveling to and from the project site. According to the CalEEMod calculations, the project would result in 5,812,683 annual VMT (Appendix A). Table 7 shows the estimated total annual fuel consumption of the project using the estimated trip generation and VMT with the assumed vehicle fleet mix. Table 7 Estimated Project Annual Transportation Energy Consumption Vehicle Type1 Percent of Vehicle Trips2 Annual Vehicle Miles Traveled3 Average Fuel Economy (miles/gallon)4 Total Annual Fuel Consumption (gallons) Total Fuel Consumption (MBtu)5 Passenger Cars 55.4 3,220,976 24 134,207 14,734 Light/Medium Trucks 17.6 1,024,405 17.4 58,874 7,504 Heavy Trucks/Other 8.7 503,070 7.4 67,982 8,665 Motorcycles 0.5 28,238 44.0 642 70 Total 100 4,776,690 – 261,705 30,974 1 Vehicle classes provided in CalEEMod do not correspond exactly to vehicle classes in DOT fuel consumption data, except for motorcycles. Therefore, it was assumed that passenger cars correspond to the light-duty, short-base vehicle class, light/medium trucks correspond to the light-duty long-base vehicle class, and heavy trucks/other correspond to the single unit, 2-axle 6-tire or more class. 2 Percent of vehicle trips from CalEEMod output (see Appendix A). 3 Mitigated annual VMT found in Table 4.2 “Trip Summary Information” in Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study CalEEMod output (see Appendix A). 4 DOT 2018.5 CaRFG fuel specification of 109,786 Btu/gallon used to identify conversion rate for fuel energy consumption for vehicle classes specified above (CARB 2015). 5 One gallon of gasoline is equivalent to approximately 109,786 Btu (CARB 2015), while one gallon of diesel is equivalent to approximately 127,460 Btu (Schremp 2017). Notes: Due to rounding, numbers may not add up precisely to the totals indicated. As shown in Table 7, the project would consume approximately 261,705 gallons of fuel, or 30,974 MBtu, each year for transportation uses from the operation. Operation of the proposed project would consume approximately 6,120,500 kWh (6.12 GWh) of electricity per year (Appendix A). As discussed above, the proposed project would be served by SCE, which provided more than 85,000 GWh of electricity in 2018. The project’s electricity demand would represent less than 0.01 percent of electricity provided by SCE. Therefore, SCE would have sufficient supplies for the project. Estimated natural gas consumption for the project would be 5,197,770 kBTU per year (0.056 MMthm per year) (Appendix A). The project’s natural gas demand would be serviced by the SCG, which provided 89.3 MMthm per year in 2018. The project’s natural gas consumption would represent less than 0.01 percent of natural gas provided by SCG; therefore, SCG would have sufficient supplies for the project. The project would be subject to the energy conservation requirements of the California Energy Code (Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations, California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings) and the California Green Building Standards Code (Title 24, Part 11 of the California Code of Regulations). The California Energy Code provides energy conservation standards for all new and renovated commercial and residential buildings constructed in California. The Code applies to the building envelope, space-conditioning systems, and water-heating and lighting systems of buildings and appliances. The Code provides guidance on construction techniques to maximize energy conservation. Minimum efficiency standards are given for a variety of building elements, including: appliances; water and space heating and cooling equipment; and insulation for doors, pipes, walls and ceilings. In addition, the California Green Building Standards Code sets targets for: energy efficiency; water consumption; dual plumbing systems for potable and recyclable water; diversion of construction waste from landfills; and use of environmentally sensitive materials in construction and design, including ecofriendly flooring, carpeting, paint, DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 41 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 coatings, thermal insulation, and acoustical wall and ceiling panels. The proposed residences would include solar panels, flow-smart showerheads, water-efficient faucets, dual-action toilets, EnergyStar certified appliances, and more. In conclusion, construction of the project would be temporary and typical of similar projects, and would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy. Operation of the project would increase the consumption of fuel, natural gas, and electricity from existing conditions of an undeveloped site; however, the increase would be in conformance with the latest version of California’s Green Building Standards Code and the Building Energy Efficiency Standards. In addition, SCE and SCG have sufficient energy supplies to serve the project. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact. b): No impacts. The project does not conflict with or inhibit the implementation of any energy efficiency policies adopted in the City’s General Plan. As discussed in the Greenhouse Gas section below, with implementation of mitigation, the project would not conflict with applicable greenhouse gas reduction plans, which include energy efficiency measures. Therefore, the project would not impact any state or local plan for renewable energy and energy efficiency. Conditions of Approval: None Mitigation Measures: None DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 42 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. X ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? X iv) Landslides? X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? X d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? X e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? X f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? X Sources: Menifee General Plan (2013), Exhibits S-1, “Fault Map,” S-2, “Slope Distribution,” S-3, “Liquefaction and Landslides,” and S-4, “Geologic Map”; Riverside County General Plan Figure S-8, Wind “Erosion Susceptibility Map”; Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Petra Engineering, Inc. (2018) (Appendix G); California Green Building Standards Code. Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal S-1: A community that is minimally impacted by seismic shaking and earthquake-induced or other geologic hazards. Policy S-1.1: Require all new habitable buildings and structures to be designed and built to be seismically DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 43 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 resistant in accordance with the most recent California Building Code adopted by the City. Goal S-2: A community that has used engineering solutions to reduce or eliminate the potential for injury, loss of life, property damage, and economic and social disruption caused by geologic hazards such as slope instability; compressible, collapsible, expansive or corrosive soils; and subsidence due to groundwater withdrawal. Policy S-2.1: Require all new developments to mitigate the geologic hazards that have the potential to impact habitable structures and other improvements. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: a.i): Less than Significant. Although the project site is located in seismically active Southern California, the site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (Menifee 2014). No active faults have been identified at the ground surface within City limits. According to the Geotechnical Report, the nearest active fault is the Elsinore Fault zone, which is located approximately 6.5 miles from the project site. Therefore, impacts related to ground rupture are considered less than significant. a.ii): Less than Significant. The proposed project will be subject to ground shaking impacts should a major earthquake in the area occur in the future. Potential impacts include injury or loss of life and property damage. The project site is subject to strong seismic ground shaking as are virtually all properties in Southern California. The proposed buildings are subject to the seismic design criteria of the California Building Code (CBC). The California Building Code (California Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Volume 2) contains seismic safety provisions with the aim of preventing building collapse during a design earthquake, so that occupants would be able to evacuate after the earthquake. Adherence to these requirements will reduce the potential of the building from collapsing during an earthquake, thereby minimizing injury and loss of life. Although structures may be damaged during earthquakes, adherence to seismic design requirements will minimize damage to property within the structure because the structure is designed not to collapse. The CBC is intended to provide minimum requirements to prevent major structural failure and loss of life. Adherence to existing regulations will reduce the risk of loss, injury, and death; impacts due to strong ground shaking will be less than significant. a.iii): Less Than Significant. Liquefaction is a phenomenon that occurs when soil undergoes transformation from a solid state to a liquefied condition due to the effects of increased pore-water pressure. This typically occurs where susceptible soils (particularly the medium sand to silt range) are located over a high groundwater table (within 50 feet of the surface). According to the Menifee General Plan, the project the site is not located in a zone of liquefaction (Menifee 2014). Moreover, the Geotechnical Report prepared by Petra Geosciences determined groundwater is at approximately 35 feet deep, so the potential for liquefaction is low. Therefore, impacts are considered less than significant. a.iv): No Impact. According to the Exhibit S-3 of the City of Menifee General Plan Safety Element, the project site is not located in an area where local topographic and geological conditions suggest the potential for earthquake-induced landslides (Menifee 2013). The project site is relatively flat and there is no potential for landslides on the project site. No impacts to the proposed project site from landslides will occur. b): Less than Significant. Topsoil is used to cover surface areas for the establishment and maintenance of vegetation due to its high concentrations of organic matter and microorganisms. The project has the potential to expose surficial soils to wind and water erosion during construction activities (Riverside County 2019). Wind erosion will be minimized through soil stabilization measures required by South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust), such as daily watering. Water erosion will be prevented through the City’s standard erosion control practices required pursuant to the California Building Code and the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), such as silt fencing, fiber rolls, or DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 44 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 sandbags. Following project construction, the site will be covered completely by paving, structures, and landscaping. Additionally, the Geotechnical Report recommends replacing current topsoil with higher compacted engineered fill. Impacts related to soil erosion or loss of top soil will be less than significant with implementation of existing regulations and adherence to recommendations outlined in the Geotechnical Report. c): Less than Significant. Impacts related to liquefaction and landslides are discussed above. Lateral spreading is the downslope movement of surface sediment due to liquefaction in a subsurface layer. The downslope movement is due to gravity and earthquake shaking combined. Such movement can occur on slope gradients of as little as one degree. The maximum sloping gradient is approximately two percent at the highest point. Lateral spreading typically damages pipelines, utilities, bridges, and structures. Lateral spreading of the ground surface during a seismic activity usually occurs along the weak shear zones within a liquefiable soil layer and has been observed to generally take place toward a free face (i.e. retaining wall, slope, or channel) and to lesser extent on ground surfaces with a very gentle slope. Furthermore, the project is required to be constructed in accordance with the CBC. The CBC includes a requirement that any City-approved recommendations contained in the soils report be made conditions of the building permit. Therefore, with the project’s compliance to these conditions and adherence to recommendations listed in the Geotechnical Investigation, impacts arising from unstable soils will be reduced to less than significant. d): Less than Significant. The Geotechnical Investigation concluded that the expansion potential for the project site is considered low. Import materials and subgrade soils will be analyzed in accordance with the Geotechnical Investigation recommendations. Moreover, the project would comply with CBC design considerations. Impacts would be less than significant. e): No Impact. The project proposed to connect to the existing municipal sewer system and will not require the use of septic tanks. No impacts will occur. f): Less than Significant. Paleontological resources are the fossilized remains of organisms from prehistoric environments found in geologic strata. These resources are valued for the information they yield about the history of the earth and its past ecological settings. The potential for fossil occurrence depends on the rock type exposed at the surface in a given area. As part of the Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County was requested to conduct a search of its records to determine the relative sensitivity of the project area for paleontological resources. According to the Museum, the project site is primarily underlain by Older Quaternary Alluvium and that shallow excavations into Older Quaternary Alluvium would be unlikely to yield significant fossil remains; however, deeper excavations could yield significant paleontological specimens (FCS 2019). Therefore, a standard condition of approval for the requirement to conduct paleontological monitoring during ground disturbing activities would be implemented. With the implementation of GEO-1, which is a standard condition of approval, impacts to previously undiscovered paleontological resources would be less than significant. Conditions of Approval: The project shall comply with technical recommendations of the geotechnical study. GEO-1 (Paleontological Monitoring) The permittee shall retain a qualified paleontologist approved by the City of Menifee to create and implement a project-specific plan for monitoring site grading/earthmoving activities which exceeds 5 feet in depth in native sedimentary. The project paleontologist retained shall review the approved development plan and shall conduct any pre-construction work necessary to render appropriate monitoring and mitigation requirements as appropriate. These requirements shall be documented by the project paleontologist in a Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP). This PRIMP shall be submitted to DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 45 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 the Community Development Department for review and approval prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. Information to be contained in the PRIMP, at a minimum and in addition to other industry standard and Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards, are as follows: a) The project paleontologist shall participate in a pre-construction project meeting with development staff and construction operations to ensure an understanding of any mitigation measures required during construction, as applicable. b) Paleontological monitoring of earthmoving activities will be conducted on an as-needed basis by the project paleontologist during all earthmoving activities that may expose sensitive strata. Earthmoving activities in areas of the project area where previously undisturbed strata will be buried but not otherwise disturbed will not be monitored. The project paleontologist or his/her assign will have the authority to reduce monitoring once he/she determines the probability of encountering fossils has dropped below an acceptable level. c) If the project paleontologist finds fossil remains, earthmoving activities will be diverted temporarily around the fossil site until the remains have been evaluated and recovered. Earthmoving will be allowed to proceed through the site when the project paleontologist determines the fossils have been recovered and/or the site mitigated to the extent necessary. d) If fossil remains are encountered by earthmoving activities when the project paleontologist is not onsite, these activities will be diverted around the fossil site and the project paleontologist called to the site immediately to recover the remains. e) If fossil remains are encountered, fossiliferous rock will be recovered from the fossil site and processed to allow for the recovery of smaller fossil remains. Test samples may be recovered from other sampling sites in the rock unit if appropriate. f) Any recovered fossil remains will be prepared to the point of identification and identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible by knowledgeable paleontologists. The remains then will be curated (assigned and labeled with museum* repository fossil specimen numbers and corresponding fossil site numbers, as appropriate; places in specimen trays and, if necessary, vials with completed specimen data cards) and catalogued, an associated specimen data and corresponding geologic and geographic site data will be archived (specimen and site numbers and corresponding data entered into appropriate museum repository catalogs and computerized data bases) at the museum repository by a laboratory technician. The remains will then be accessioned into the museum* repository fossil collection, where they will be permanently stored, maintained, and, along with associated specimen and site data, made available for future study by qualified scientific investigators. * The City of Menifee must be consulted on the repository/museum to receive the fossil material prior to being curated. g) A qualified paleontologist shall prepare a report of findings made during all site grading activity with an appended itemized list of fossil specimens recovered during grading (if any). This report shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval prior to building final inspection as described elsewhere in these conditions. All reports shall be signed by the project paleontologist and all other professionals DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 46 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 responsible for the report's content (e.g. Professional Geologist, Professional Engineer, etc.), as appropriate. Two wet-signed original copies of the report shall be submitted directly to the Community Development Department along with a copy of this condition, deposit- based fee and the grading plan for appropriate case processing and tracking. Mitigation Measures: None VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS -- Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? X b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? X Source: Rincon Consultants (Rincon) Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study (2020) (Appendix A) Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal OSC-4: Efficient and environmentally appropriate use and management of energy and mineral resources to ensure their availability for future generations. Policy OSC-4.1: Apply energy efficiency and conservation practices in land use, transportation demand management, and subdivision and building design. Policy OSC-4.2: Evaluate public and private efforts to develop and operate alternative systems of energy production, including solar, wind, and fuel cell. Goal OSC-10: An environmentally aware community that is responsive to changing climate conditions and actively seeks to reduce local greenhouse gas emissions. Policy OSC-10.1: Align the City's local GHG reduction targets to be consistent with the statewide GHG reduction target of AB 32. Policy OSC-10.2: Align the City's long-term GHG reduction goal consistent with the statewide GHG reduction goal of Executive Order S-03-05. Policy OSC-10.3: Participate in regional greenhouse gas emission reduction initiatives. Policy OSC-10.4: Consider impacts to climate change as a factor in evaluation of policies, strategies, and projects. Existing Setting: Greenhouse Gas Overview Gases that absorb and re-emit infrared radiation in the atmosphere are called greenhouse gases (GHGs). The gases that are widely seen as the principal contributors to human-induced climate change include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxides (N2O), fluorinated gases such as hydrofluorocarbons DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 47 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 (HFCs) and perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Water vapor is excluded from the list of GHGs because it is short-lived in the atmosphere, and its atmospheric concentrations are largely determined by natural processes, such as oceanic evaporation. GHGs are emitted by both natural processes and human activities. Of these gases, CO2 and CH4 are emitted in the greatest quantities from human activities. Emissions of CO2 are largely byproducts of fossil fuel combustion, whereas CH4 largely results from off-gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills. Man-made GHGs, many of which have greater heat-absorption potential than CO2, include fluorinated gases and SF6 (U.S. EPA 2020). However, because the project is a non-industrial development, the quantity of fluorinated gases would not be significant since fluorinated gases are primarily associated with industrial processes; therefore, fluorinated gases are not analyzed further in this document. Different types of GHGs have varying global warming potentials (GWPs). The GWP of a GHG is the potential of a gas or aerosol to trap heat in the atmosphere over a specified timescale (generally, 100 years). Because GHGs absorb different amounts of heat, a common reference gas (CO2) is used to relate the amount of heat absorbed to the amount of the gas emissions, referred to as “carbon dioxide equivalent” (CO2e), and is the amount of a GHG emitted multiplied by its GWP. Carbon dioxide has a 100-year GWP of one. By contrast, CH4 has a GWP of 25, meaning its global warming effect is 25 times greater than carbon dioxide on a molecule per molecule basis (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] 2007). N2O has a GWP of 298 (IPCC 2007). Methodology: The Project’s GHG emissions from construction and operation were calculated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2016.3.2. CalEEMod is a statewide land use emissions computer model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental professionals to quantify potential criteria pollutant and GHG emissions associated with both construction and operations from a variety of land use projects. The Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study for the proposed project provides further detail about the methodology and is available in Appendix A (Rincon 2020). Significance Threshold Individual projects do not generate sufficient GHG emissions to substantially influence climate change. However, physical changes caused by a project can contribute incrementally to cumulative effects that may be significant, even if individual changes resulting from a project are limited. The issue of climate change typically involves an analysis of whether a project’s contribution towards an impact would be cumulatively considerable. “Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064[h][1]). The City has not adopted its own numeric threshold of significance for determining impacts for GHG emissions. In guidance provided by the SCAQMD’s GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group in September 2010, SCAQMD considered a tiered approach to determine the significance of residential and commercial projects. The draft tiered approach is outlined in meeting minutes dated September 29, 2010 (SCAQMD 2010):  Tier 1. If the project is exempt from further environmental analysis under existing statutory or categorical exemptions, there is a presumption of less than significant impacts with respect to climate change. If not, then the Tier 2 threshold should be considered.  Tier 2. Consists of determining whether or not the project is consistent with a GHG reduction plan that may be part of a local general plan, for example. The concept embodied in this tier is equivalent DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 48 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 to the existing concept of consistency in CEQA Guidelines section 15064(h)(3), 15125(d) or 15152(a). Under this Tier, if the proposed project is consistent with the qualifying local GHG reduction plan, it is not significant for GHG emissions. If there is not an adopted plan, then a Tier 3 approach would be appropriate.  Tier 3. Establishes a screening significance threshold level to determine significance. The Working Group has provided a recommendation of 3,000 MT CO2e per year for residential projects.  Tier 4. Establishes a service population threshold to determine significance. The Working Group has provided a recommendation of 4.8 MT of CO2e per year for land use projects. The applicable threshold for the proposed project would be a bright line threshold of 3,000 MT of CO2e per year for residential projects in accordance with Tier 3.1 Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: a): Less than Significant. Construction activities associated with the Project would result in emissions of GHGs primarily through the operation of construction equipment and truck and worker trips during the approximately five year and four-month construction period. For construction phase Project emissions, GHGs are quantified and amortized over the life of the Project. To amortize the emissions over the life of the Project, the SCAQMD recommends calculating the total greenhouse gas emissions for the construction activities, dividing it by a 30-year project life then adding that number to the annual operational phase GHG emissions. Table 8 provides the amortized construction emissions for the Project. Operational greenhouse gas emissions from the project would arise from energy use, solid waste, water use, and mobile emissions. Mobile emissions were determined from the vehicle trips generated by the project, which were determined by CalEEMod defaults for the project land use. Table 8 below combines the amortized construction emissions and GHG emissions associated with the operation of the project. Table 8 Annual Project GHG Emissions Emission Source CO2e Emissions (metric tons per year) Annual Construction Emissions (amortized over 30 years) 78 Area 17 Energy 477 Mobile 2,181 Stationary <1 Solid Waste 106 Water 46 Total CO2e (All sources) 2,827 Service Population 515 Emissions per Service Person 5.5 Project-Specific Efficiency Threshold (MT CO2e/SP/year) 3.2 Exceedance? Yes Source: Rincon 2020, Appendix A DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 49 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 b): Less than Significant Consistency with 2017 Scoping Plan The principal state plan and policy is AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, and the follow up, SB 32. The quantitative goal of AB 32 is to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and the goal of SB 32 is to reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. Pursuant to the SB 32 goal, the 2017 Scoping Plan was created to outline goals and measures for the state to achieve the reductions. The 2017 Scoping Plan’s goals include reducing fossil fuel use and energy demand and maximizing recycling and diversion from landfills. The project would be consistent with these goals through project design, which includes complying with the latest Title 24 Green Building Code and Building Efficiency Energy Standards, installing solar panels, flow-smart showerheads, water-efficient faucets, dual-activated toilets, Energy Star certified appliances, low-e windows, spray foam insulation, advanced framing, sealed insulated ducts, thermal breaks, and conditioned attics. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Consistency with the City’s General Plan Relevant GHG policies discussed in the City General Plan EIR’s GHG Emissions section are addressed in Table 9, below. As shown in the table, the project would be consistent with the applicable strategies and policies in the City General Plan EIR. Table 9 Menifee General Plan EIR GHG Policy Consistency Analysis Menifee General Plan GHG Policy Project Consistency Pavley I. California vehicle GHG emission standards were enacted under AB 1493 (Pavley I). Pavley I is a clean-car standard that reduces GHG emissions from new passenger vehicles (light-duty auto to medium-duty vehicles) from 2009 through 2016 and is anticipated to reduce GHG emissions from new passenger vehicles by 30 percent in 2016. California implements the Pavley I standards through a waiver granted to California by the EPA. Not applicable. This is a statewide measure that cannot be implemented by a project applicant or lead agency. However, the standards would be applicable to the light-duty vehicles that would access the project site during construction and operations of the project. Implementation of this project will not impede or hinder the state’s ability to implement this measure. LCFS. Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) for transportation fuels sold within the state. Executive Order S-1-07 sets a declining standard for GHG emissions measured in C02e gram per unit of fuel energy sold in California. The LCFS requires a reduction of 2.5 percent in the carbon intensity of California’s transportation fuels by 2015 and a reduction of at least 10 percent by 2020. The LCFS applies to refiners, blenders, producers, and importers of transportation fuels and would use market-based mechanisms to allow these providers to choose how they reduce emissions during the fuel cycle using the most economically feasible methods Not applicable. This is a statewide measure that cannot be implemented by a project applicant or lead agency. However, the standards would be applicable to the light-duty vehicles that would access the project site during construction and operations of the project. Implementation of this project will not impede or hinder the state’s ability to implement this measure. C-1.1. Require roadways to: comply with federal, state, and local design and safety standards; meet the needs of multiple types of users (families, commuters, recreational beginners, exercise experts) and meet ADA standards and guidelines; be compatible with streetscape and surrounding land uses; and be maintained in accordance with best practices. Consistent. The project’s internal roadways would comply applicable standards. Title 24 Energy Standards. Energy conservation standards for new residential and nonresidential buildings were adopted Consistent. This is a measure for the State to increase its energy efficiency standards in new DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 50 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 by the California Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission in June 1977 and updated triennially (Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Title 24 requires the design of building shells and building components to conserve energy. The standards are updated periodically to allow for consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods. buildings. The project is required to build to the new standards and would increase its energy efficiency through compliance. Title 24 CALGreen. On July 17, 2008, the California Building Standards Commission adopted the nation’s first green building standards. The California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) was adopted as part of the California Building Standards Code (Part 11, Title 24, California Code of Regulations). CALGreen established planning and design standards for sustainable site development, energy efficiency (in excess of the California Energy Code requirements), water conservation, material conservation, and internal air contaminants. Consistent. This is a measure for the State to increase its energy efficiency standards in new buildings. The project is required to build to the new standards and would increase its energy efficiency through compliance. Menifee General Plan GHG Policy Project Consistency 33% RPS. Executive Order S-14-08 was signed in November 2008, which expands the state’s renewable energy standard to 33 percent renewable power by 2020. In 2011, the state legislature adopted this higher standard in SBX1-2. Renewable sources of electricity include wind, small hydropower, solar, geothermal, biomass, and biogas. The increase in renewable sources for electricity production will decrease indirect GHG emissions from development projects, because electricity production from renewable sources is generally considered carbon neutral Not applicable. This is a statewide measure that cannot be implemented by a project applicant or lead agency. Southern California Edison is required to increase its percent of power supply from renewable sources to 33 percent by the year 2020 pursuant to various regulations. The project would purchase power that comprises a greater amount of renewable sources and could install renewable solar power systems that will assist the utility in achieving the mandate. OSC-9.5. Comply with the mandatory requirements of Title 24 Part 11 of the California Building Standards Code (CALGreen) and the Title 24 Part 6 Building Energy Efficiency Standards Consistent. The project would comply with required measures of Title 24. Source: Menifee General Plan Draft EIR, Table 5.7-9 (Menifee 2013) Conditions of Approval: None Mitigation Measures: None DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 51 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -- Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? X b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? X c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? X d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? X e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? X f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? X Sources: Menifee General Plan (2013), Exhibit S-6, “High Fire Hazard Areas,” and Exhibit S-7, “Critical Facilities”; State of California, Department of Toxics Substances Control, EnviroStor database; State of California, Department of Toxics Substances Control (DTSC), Cortese List of Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites Database; State of California, Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Geotracker, All Hazards Site Search; Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment prepared by Petra Geosciences, Inc. (2018) (Appendix H); and Limited Phase II Environmental Soil Residue Survey prepared by Petra Geosciences, Inc. (2018) (Appendix I) Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal LU-4: Ensure development is consistent with the Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Goal S-4: A community that has effective fire mitigation and response measures in place, and as a result is minimally impacted by wildland and structure fires. Policy S-4.1: Require fire-resistant building construction materials, the use of vegetation control methods, DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 52 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 and other construction and fire prevention features to reduce the hazard of wildland fire. Policy S-4.2: Ensure to the maximum extent possible, that fire services, such as firefighting equipment and personnel, infrastructure, and response times, are adequate for all sections of the city. Policy S-4.3: Use technology to identify flood-prone areas and to notify residents and motorists of impending flood hazards and evacuation procedures. Policy S-4.4: Review development proposals for impacts to fire facilities and compatibility with fire areas or mitigate Goal S-5: A community that has reduced the potential for hazardous materials contamination. Policy S-5.1: Locate facilities involved in the production, use, storage, transport, or disposal of hazardous materials away from land uses that may be adversely impacted by such activities and areas susceptible to impacts or damage from a natural disaster. Policy S-5.2: Ensure that the fire department can continue to respond safely and effectively to a hazardous materials incident in the City, whether it is a spill at a permitted facility, or the result of an accident along a section of the freeway or railroads that extend across the City. Policy S-5.4: Ensure that all facilities that handle hazardous materials comply with federal and state laws pertaining to the management of hazardous wastes and materials. Policy S-5.5: Require facilities that handle hazardous materials to implement mitigation measures that reduce the risks associated with hazardous material production, storage, and disposal. Goal S-6: A City that responds and recovers in an effective and timely manner from natural disasters such as flooding, fire, and earthquakes, and as a result is not impacted by civil unrest that may occur following a natural disaster. Policy S-6.1: Continuously review, update, and implement emergency preparedness, response, and recovery plans that make the best use of the City- and county-specific emergency management resources available. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: a): Less than Significant. The proposed project could result in a significant hazard to the public if the project includes the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials or places housing near a facility which routinely transports, uses, or disposes of hazardous materials. The proposed project is located within a residential zoned area that contains a mix of housing and vacant land. The routine use, transport, or disposal of hazardous materials is primarily associated with industrial uses that require such materials for manufacturing operations or produce hazardous wastes as by-products of production applications. During construction, there would be a minor level of transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes that are typical of construction projects. This would include fuels and lubricants for construction machinery, coating materials, etc. Routine construction control measures and best management practices for hazardous materials storage, application, waste disposal, accident prevention and clean-up, etc. would be sufficient to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. With regard to project operation, widely used hazardous materials common at residential uses include cleaners, pesticides, and food waste. The remnants of these and other products are disposed of as household hazardous waste that are prohibited or discouraged from being disposed of at local landfills. Regular operation and cleaning of residential use would not result in significant impacts involving use, storage, transport, or disposal of hazardous wastes and substances. Use of common household hazardous DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 53 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 materials and their disposal does not present a substantial health risk to the community. Impacts associated with the routine transport and use of hazardous materials or wastes would be less than significant. b): Less than Significant. There are no open leaking underground storage tank (LUST) cases on or near the project site (SWRCB 2020). The proposed project consists of the construction of 175 dwelling units. Therefore, there would be no impact related to the release of hazardous materials into the environment as a result of the proposed project. c): No Impact. There are no existing or proposed schools within one-quarter mile of the project site. Therefore, there is no impact with regard to the transportation, storage, or use of hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of a school. d): Less than Significant. The project site is not located on a site listed on the state Cortese List; a compilation of various sites throughout the state that have been compromised due to soil or groundwater contamination from past uses (CalEPA 2020). Petra conducted the Limited Phase II Soil Residue Survey to evaluate the potential for the presence of Organochlorine Pesticides (OCPs), and arsenic soil residues from the historical use of the property and vicinity for agricultural purposes. Six samples and one duplicate sample were tested for OCP residues. The samples contained no detectable levels of organochlorinated pesticides or were well below the 2018 EPA Region 9 Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) and 2010 California Human Health Screening Levels, and arsenic residues detected in samples collected onsite do not appear to represent a recognized environmental condition with regards to the site soils analyzed. Therefore, no impact would occur. Based upon review of the Geotechnical Report, the project site is not listed on the Cortese List, and is not: • Listed as a hazardous waste and substance site by the Department of Toxic Substances Control • Listed as a leaking underground storage tank (LUST) site by the State Water Resources Control Board • Listed as a hazardous solid waste disposal site by the SWRCB • Currently subject to a Cease and Desist Order (CDO) or a Cleanup and Abatement Order (CAO) as issued by the SWRCB or • Developed with a hazardous waste facility subject to corrective action by the DTSC e): Less than Significant. The Perris Valley Airport is a private airport that is located 9.5 miles northeast of the project site, thus no impacts related to hazards associated with this airport would occur. Additionally, the French Valley Airport, located approximately 4.5 miles southeast would impose no hazards that are associated with this airport. The project site is located outside the Perris Valley Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan as well as the French Valley Airport Compatibility Plan. Therefore, the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area and impacts would be less than significant. f): Less than Significant. The proposed project consists of the development of single-family residential dwelling units. All project elements, including landscaping, will be sited with sufficient clearance from the proposed buildings so as not to interfere with emergency access to and evacuation from the project site. The proposed project is required to comply with the California Fire Code as adopted by the Menifee Municipal Code. Primary access to the site is provided via Lindenberger Road and Eagle Road with the westerly portion of the project having a secondary access provided via Pitman Lane. All streets within this subdivision are proposed to be public. The project will not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan because no permanent public street or lane closures are proposed. Project impacts will be less than significant. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 54 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 g): No Impact. According to Exhibit S-6 of the Menifee General Plan, the project site is not located within a fire hazard zone. Reference Section XX for further discussion. There would be no impacts. Conditions of Approval: None Mitigation Measures: None X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? X b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? X c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site; ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site; iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or iv. Impede or redirect flood flows? X d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? X e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? X Sources: Menifee General Plan (2013), Safety Element Exhibit S-5, “Flood Hazards” and Exhibits S-B2.1 through S-B2.7; Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map 06065C1445H; Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Huitt- Zollars (2020) (Appendix E); Drainage Study prepared by Huitt- Zollars (2020) (Appendix F); Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Petra Geosciences Inc. (2018) (Appendix G); Eastern Municipal Water District: Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal S-3: A community that is minimally disrupted by flooding and inundation hazards. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 55 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Policy S-3.1: Require that all new developments and redevelopments in areas susceptible to flooding (such as the 100-year floodplain and areas known to the City to flood during intense or prolonged rainfall events) incorporate mitigation measures designed to mitigate flood hazards. Policy S-3.2: Reduce flood hazards in developed areas known to flood. Policy OSC-7.8: Protect groundwater quality by decommissioning existing septic systems and establishing connections to sanitary sewer infrastructure. Policy OSC-7.9: Ensure that high quality potable water resources continue to be available by managing stormwater runoff, wellhead protection, and other sources of pollutants. Policy OSC-7.10: Preserve natural floodplains, including Salt Creek, Ethanac Wash, Paloma Wash, and Warm Springs Creek, to facilitate water percolation, replenishment of the natural aquifer, proper drainage, and prevention of flood damage. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: a): Less than Significant. A project normally would have an impact on surface water quality if discharges associated with the project would create pollution, contamination, or nuisance as defined in Water Code Section 13050, or cause regulatory standards to be violated as defined in the applicable National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permit or Water Quality Control Plan for a receiving water body. For the purpose of this specific issue, a significant impact could occur if the project would discharge water that does not meet the quality standards of the agencies which regulate surface water quality and water discharge into stormwater drainage systems. Significant impacts could also occur if the project does not comply with all applicable regulations with regard to surface water quality as governed by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). These regulations include preparation of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to reduce potential post-construction water quality impacts. Construction Impacts Three general sources of potential short-term, construction-related stormwater pollution associated with the proposed project include: 1) the handling, storage, and disposal of construction materials containing pollutants; 2) the maintenance and operation of construction equipment; and 3) earth-moving activities which, when not controlled, may generate soil erosion via storm runoff or mechanical equipment. The proposed project will disturb approximately 56.58 gross acres of land and therefore will be subject to NPDES permit requirements during construction activities. Pursuant to the Menifee Municipal Code § 15.01.015, new development or redevelopment projects shall control stormwater runoff so as to prevent any deterioration of water quality that will impair subsequent or competing uses of the water. The Department of Public Works and Engineering will review and approve Best Management Practices (BMPs) contained in the project applicant’s submitted Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be implemented to reduce the discharge of pollutants during construction. The project applicant’s SWPPP shall identify erosion control BMPs to minimize pollutant discharges during construction activities. These identified BMPs will include stabilized construction entrances, sand bagging, designated concrete washout, tire wash racks, silt fencing, and curb cut/inlet protection. Impacts will be less than significant with implementation of existing regulations. Operational Impacts Proposed construction of the project would increase impervious areas by replacing the undeveloped property with residential dwellings and associated paving and landscaping. Landscaping is proposed as part of the project design along the boundaries of the site and within the subdivision. Although the amount of impervious surfaces will be greater than existing conditions, on-site runoff for development south of Scott Rd. will drain north of the property and on-site runoff for development north of Scott Rd. will drain south to an existing DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 56 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 headwall located along Scott Rd. Compliance with existing federal, state, and local regulations related to water quality, implementation of BMP’s included in the project construction SWPPP would result in impacts to water quality being less than significant. b): Less than Significant. If the project removes an existing groundwater recharge area or substantially reduces runoff that results in groundwater recharge such that existing wells will no longer be able to operate, a potentially significant impact could occur. The project site is located in the Menifee Hydrologic Subarea (HSA) in the Perris South Hydrologic Area of the San Jacinto Valley Hydraulic Unit. The project site overlies the West San Jacinto Groundwater Basin. According to the General Plan EIR, there are no percolation basins or other areas in the City used for intentional recharge of groundwater basins. Menifee Hydrologic Subarea (HSA) in the Perris South Hydrologic Area of the San Jacinto Valley Hydraulic Unit. Therefore, the increase in impermeable surface would not interfere with intentional groundwater recharge. Impacts would be less than significant. c): Less than Significant. Potentially significant impacts to the existing drainage pattern of the site or area could occur if development of the project results in substantial on- or off-site erosion or siltation. The project would collect and convey on-site runoff to proposed bio-retention basins located within landscaped areas. A site drainage plan is required by the City of Menifee and was reviewed by the City Engineer. The final grading and drainage plan will be approved by the City Department of Public Works and Engineering during plan check review. Erosion and siltation reduction measure BMP’s contained in the required SWPPP will be implemented during construction. At the completion of construction, the project would consist of impervious surfaces, landscaping, a bio retention basin; therefore, the development would not be subject to substantial erosion. According to the Preliminary WQMP prepared for the project, the project site contains no natural hydrologic features. Therefore, development of the proposed project will not alter the course of a natural stream or river, as none are present. There is an existing man-made hydrologic feature on the project site, but it would be avoided by development. During construction, the project applicant will be required to comply with drainage and runoff guidelines pursuant to City of Menifee guidelines. Construction of the proposed project will increase the net area of impermeable surfaces on the site because the site is currently vacant and contains no impervious surface cover. Project implementation will not result in alteration of any existing drainage course. Permits to connect to the existing storm drainage system will be obtained prior to construction. Therefore, the increase in discharges will not impact local storm drain capacity. The project will implement various permanent structural and operational source control BMPs to limit discharges of pollutants to the stormwater system, including pesticide reduction strategies, and refuse area maintenance. With implementation of the BMPs, other impacts from polluted runoff, such as from oil and other pollutants from parking areas, will be reduced to acceptable levels. Therefore, impacts will be less than significant. d): Less than Significant. According to flood maps prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the proposed project site is located in Zone X, an area of minimal flood hazard (FEMA 2014). The project site is not located in an area subject to inundation by the 1-percent-annual-chance flood event. There are several dams upstream of Menifee that could inundate portions of the City if they fail catastrophically. These are the West, East, and Saddle Dams of Diamond Valley Lake, the Forebay Dam (also associated with Diamond Valley Lake), Lake Perris Dam, Lake Hemet Dam, and Pigeon Pass Dam (which impounds Poorman Reservoir). However, the project site is not located within a potential dam inundation area. The design and construction of the dams for earthquake resistance, in combination with monitoring of the dams, reduces risks of dam failure due to earthquakes. Dam inundation impacts will be less than significant. The project site is not subject to tsunami due to its elevation and distance (over 30 miles) from the ocean. There are several reservoirs in the City of Menifee associated with Menifee Lakes Country Club DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 57 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 (approximately 3.5 miles south of the project site). There is no possibility of a seiche from these reservoirs affecting the project site given the project’s location. As noted in Section VII, the project site has not been identified as being in an area susceptible to landslides, thus the potential for mudflow is relatively low because the project does not lie in a landslide hazard zone and no natural rivers or streams are located in the project vicinity. No impact will occur. e): The project site is located in the West San Jacinto Groundwater Management Area, which is currently managed through a Groundwater Management Plan, but will be replaced by a Groundwater Sustainability Plan in 2022. The San Jacinto Groundwater Basin is deemed a high priority basin, but not critically overdrafted. As previously stated, the project will not interfere with intentional groundwater recharge or result in substantially degrade water quality. Impacts will be less than significant. In addition, the Santa Ana Reginal Water Quality Control Board’s (RWQCB) Basin Plan is designed to preserve and enhance water quality and protect the beneficial uses of all regional waters. There are two existing drainage areas. Drainage Management Area (DMA) A flows to an existing headwall located South of the site on Scott Road. DMA B drains north of the site to a low point located off-site. The specific downstream facilities are evaluated below. • DMA A (25.2 acres) downstream drainage system flows to an existing headwall located south of the site. Drainage is then conveyed to an existing 36 inch Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) and drains to the undeveloped land South of Scott Road. Runoff continues to: Warm Springs, Temecula Creek, Santa Margarita River and then the Pacific Ocean. • DMA B (49.6 acres) drains north of the site to future Lindenberger Road and confluences with off-site flows that drain onto the project site. Runoff continues to: Paloma Wash, Salt Creek Channel, Canyon Lake, Lake Elsinore, Temescal Creek, Temescal Creek, Santa Ana River and then the Pacific Ocean. The NPDES Permit requires the Project to incorporate permanent (post-construction) stormwater mitigation measures and mandates specific performance criteria that must be achieved concerning the retention of stormwater runoff and the protection of water quality. The primary purpose of these performance criteria and related BMPs is to reduce the quantity and improve the quality of stormwater runoff that leaves a site. Compliance with applicable stormwater capture and treatment requirements in terms of Project site design and the design, installation, and maintenance of on-site stormwater quality BMPs would improve the overall quality of the stormwater leaving the Project site. As a result of the above, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Basin Plan. Conditions of Approval: None Mitigation Measures: None DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 58 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Physically divide an established community? X b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? X Sources: Menifee General Plan (2013); Exhibit LU-2, “Land Use Map”; Menifee Zoning Map Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal LU-1: Land uses and building types that result in a community where residents at all stages of life, employers, workers, and visitors have a diversity of options of where they can live, work, shop, and recreate within Menifee. Policy LU-1.1: Concentrate growth in strategic locations to help preserve rural areas, create place and identity, provide infrastructure efficiently, and foster the use of transit options. Policy LU-1.4: Preserve, protect, and enhance established rural, estate, and residential neighborhoods by providing sensitive and well-designed transitions (building design, landscape, etc.) between these neighborhoods and adjoining areas. Policy LU-1.5: Support development and land use patterns, where appropriate, that reduce reliance on the automobile and capitalize on multimodal transportation opportunities. Policy LU-1.6: Coordinate land use, infrastructure, and transportation planning and analysis with regional, county, and other local agencies to further regional and sub-regional goals for jobs-housing balance. Policy LU-1.8: Ensure new development is carefully designed to avoid or incorporate natural features, including washes, creeks, and hillsides. Policy LU-1.9: Allow for flexible development standards provided that the potential benefits and merit of projects can be balanced with potential impacts. Policy LU-1.10: Buffer sensitive land uses, such as residences, schools, care facilities, and recreation areas from major air pollutant emission sources, including freeways, manufacturing, hazardous materials storage, wastewater treatment, and similar uses. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: a): No Impact. The project site and surrounding area consist of vacant, residential land, and surface street features. The project would be compatible with the surrounding land uses and would not impact adjacent uses with respect to building height, massing, or intensity of development. The project is located entirely within the property and does not propose a structure, roadway, or flood control channel which would divide an established community. There would be no impacts. b): Less than Significant. The project site is designated Residential (2.1-5 R du/ac) and is zoned as Low Density Residential (LDR-2). According to the General Plan Land Use Element, the areas designated Residential (2.1-5 du/ac) are intended for single-family detached and attached residences with a range of two DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 59 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 to five dwelling units per acre. The proposed project would comply with all development standards set forth in the development standards for the 2.1-5 du/ac land use designation and the LDR-2 zone. The project proposed to utilize the City’s cluster development standards pursuant to Section 9.170 of the City’s Municipal Code. One of the purposes of the cluster development subdivision code is to provide: “site planning and unity of design in harmony with the natural features and constraints of specific sites, and particularly on sites with unique or severe topographic or hydrologic features and biological resources.” The proposed project site contains a drainage feature, riparian/riverine habitat and a vernal pool. The proposed design of the project intentionally avoids these features and therefore meets the intent of this Section. The project also complies with the development standards of Section 9.170. The proposed project would also be consistent with the City’s General Plan, Zoning Code and Housing Element, including policies intended to mitigate environmental impacts as noted in other sections of this document. Impacts would be less than significant. Conditions of Approval: None Mitigation Measures: None XII. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? X b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? X Sources: Menifee General Plan Draft EIR; Menifee General Plan Exhibit OSC-3, “Mineral Resource Zones” Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal OSC-4: Efficient and environmentally appropriate use and management of energy and mineral resources to ensure their availability for future generations. Policy OSC-4.4: Require that any future mining activities be in compliance with the State Mining Reclamation Act, federal and state environmental regulations, and local ordinances. Policy OSC-4.5: Limit the impacts of mining operations on the City's natural open space, biological and scenic resources, and any adjacent land uses. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: a-b): No Impacts. The project site is located within an MRZ-3 zone; an area containing known or inferred mineral occurrences of undetermined mineral resource significance. The site does not have any known presence of significant mineral resources. Additionally, there are no mineral extraction or processing facilities on the site. No mineral resources are known to exist within the vicinity. According to the General Plan Draft EIR, no known significant mineral resources have been designated in the City of Menifee. Thus, the project will not impact mineral resources. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 60 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Conditions of Approval: None Mitigation Measures: None DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 61 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 XIII. NOISE -- Would the project result in: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? X b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? X c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? X Sources: Menifee General Plan (2013), Noise Element; Menifee General Plan Draft EIR, Figure 5.12-3, “Airport Noise Contours”; Menifee Municipal Code; Lindenberger Subdivision Noise and Vibration Study. Rincon 2020 (Appendix J) Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal N-1: Noise-sensitive land uses are protected from excessive noise and vibration exposure. Policy N-1.1: Assess the compatibility of proposed land uses with the noise environment when preparing, revising, or reviewing development project applications. Policy N-1.2: Require new projects to comply with the noise standards of local, regional, and state building code regulations, including but not limited to the City's Municipal Code, Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, the California Green Building Code, and subdivision and development codes. Policy N-1.3: Require noise abatement measures to enforce compliance with any applicable regulatory mechanisms, including building codes and subdivision and zoning regulations, and ensure that the recommended mitigation measures are implemented. Policy N-1.7: Mitigate exterior and interior noises to the levels listed in the table below to the extent feasible, for stationary sources adjacent to sensitive receptors: Table N-1 Stationary Source Noise Standards Land Use Interior Standards Exterior Standards Residential 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 40 Leq (10 minute) 55 Leq (10 minute) 45 Leq (10 minute) 65 Leq (10 minute) Policy N-1.8 Locate new development in areas where noise levels are appropriate for the proposed uses. Consider federal, state, and City noise standards and guidelines as a part of new development review. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 62 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Policy N-1.9: Limit the development of new noise-producing uses adjacent to noise-sensitive receptors and require that new noise-producing land be are designed with adequate noise abatement measures. Policy N-1.10: Guide noise-tolerant land uses into areas irrevocably committed to land uses that are noise-producing, such as transportation corridors adjacent to the I-215 or within the projected noise contours of any adjacent airports. Policy N-1.11: Discourage the siting of noise-sensitive uses in areas in excess of 65 dBA CNEL without appropriate mitigation. Policy N-1.13: Require new development to minimize vibration impacts to adjacent uses during demolition and construction. Goal N-2: Minimal Noise Spillover. Minimal noise spillover from noise-generating uses, such as agriculture, commercial, and industrial uses into adjoining noise-sensitive uses. Applicable Municipal Code Ordinances: Section 9.210.060(C) of the City Municipal Code provides exemptions for construction noise from the standards in the code. Specifically, the code states the following are exempt: • Private construction projects located one-quarter of a mile or more from an inhabited dwelling. • Private construction projects located within one-quarter of a mile from an inhabited dwelling, shall be permitted Monday through Saturday, except nationally recognized holidays, 6:30 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., or specified in Section 8.01.010. There shall be no construction permitted on Sunday or nationally recognized holidays unless approval is obtained from the City Building Official or City Engineer. • If construction occurs during off hours or exceeds noise thresholds, an application for a construction-related exception shall be made using the temporary use application provided by the Community Development Director in Chapter 9.105. For construction activities on Sunday or nationally recognized holidays, Section 8.01.010 of the Municipal Code shall prevail. Fundamentals of Sound and Environmental Noise Noise can be defined as unwanted sound. Sound (and therefore noise) consists of energy waves that people receive and interpret. Sound pressure levels are described in logarithmic units of ratios of sound pressures to a reference pressure, squared. These units are called bels. In order to provide a finer description of sound, a bel is subdivided into ten decibels, abbreviated dB. To account for the range of sound that human hearing perceives, a modified scale is utilized known as the A-weighted decibel (dBA). Since decibels are logarithmic units, sound pressure levels cannot be added or subtracted by ordinary arithmetic means. For example, if one automobile produces a sound pressure level of 70 dBA when it passes an observer, two cars passing simultaneously would not produce 140 dBA. In fact, they would combine to produce 73 dBA. This same principle can be applied to other traffic quantities as well. In other words, doubling the traffic volume on a street or the speed of the traffic will increase the traffic noise level by 3 dBA. Conversely, halving the traffic volume or speed will reduce the traffic noise level by 3 dBA. A 3 dBA change in sound is the beginning at which humans generally notice a barely perceptible change in sound and a 5 dBA change is generally readily perceptible. Noise consists of pitch, loudness, and duration; therefore, a variety of methods for measuring noise have been developed. According to the California General Plan Guidelines for Noise Elements, the following are common metrics for measuring noise: LEQ (Equivalent Energy Noise Level): The sound level corresponding to a steady-state sound level containing the same total energy as a time-varying signal over given sample periods. LEQ is typically DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 63 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 computed over 1-, 8-, and 24-hour sample periods. CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level): The average equivalent A-weighted sound level during a 24- hour day, obtained after addition of five decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7:00pm to 10:00pm and after addition of ten decibels to sound levels in the night from 10:00pm to 7:00am. LDN (Day-Night Average Level): The average equivalent A-weighted sound level during a 24- hour day, obtained after the addition of ten decibels to sound levels in the night after 10:00pm and before 7:00am. CNEL and LDN are utilized for describing ambient noise levels, because they account for all noise sources over an extended period of time and account for the heightened sensitivity of people to noise during the night. LEQ is better utilized for describing specific and consistent sources because of the shorter reference period. Existing Noise Environment The project is located within a residential area in the City of Menifee, which is comprised of single-family residential subdivisions, vacant land, and surface street features. The closest sensitive receptors to the project site are single-family residences located approximately 20 feet to the eastern and western boundaries of the project site, as well as a church located approximately 160 feet west of the project boundary. The background ambient noise levels in the project area are dominated by the transportation-related noise associated with Scott Road. To characterize ambient sound levels at and near the project site, two 15-minute sound level measurements were conducted on March 3, 2020 as part of the Lindenberger Subdivision Noise and Vibration Study conducted by Rincon (Appendix J). Short-Term Measurement (ST) 1 was taken off Scott Road capture roadway noise levels near the southern border of the project; ST2 was taken near the northern boundary of the project to capture ambient noise levels on the project site. Table 12 summarizes the results of the noise measurements, and Table 13 summarizes the vehicle composition of traffic during the roadway noise measurement. Detailed sound level measurement data are included in the Appendix A of the Noise and Vibration Study (Appendix J). Table 8 Project Vicinity Sound Level Monitoring Results Measurement Location Measurement Location Sample Times Approximate Distance to Primary Noise Source Leq (dBA) Lmin (dBA) Lmax (dBA) ST1 Scott Road/ Lindenberger Road intersection 10:02 – 10:17 a.m. 130 feet from Scott Road centerline 59 35 71 ST2 Northern boundary of project site 10:45 – 11:00 a.m. Ambient measurement 46 28 61 Detailed sound level measurement data are included in Appendix A of the Noise and Vibration Study (Appendix J). Table 9 Sound Level Monitoring Traffic Counts Measurement Roadway Traffic Autos Medium Trucks Heavy Trucks 1 Scott Road 15-minute count 200 5 3 One-hour Equivalent 800 20 12 Percentage 97 2 1 DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 64 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: a): Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. On-site noise-generating activities associated with the project would include short-term construction and long-term operational noise. The project would also generate off-site traffic noise along adjacent roadways. These potential effects are analyzed below. Temporary Construction Noise: Construction noise represents a short-term increase on the ambient noise levels. Construction related noise impacts are expected to create temporary and intermittent high-level noise conditions at the sensitive receivers surrounding the project site, detailed above. The City has established limits to the hours of operation. As discussed above, Section 9.210.060(C) of the City’s Municipal Code indicates that private construction projects are considered exempt from the Municipal Code noise standards if they occur within the permitted hours. However, the City’s General Plan and Municipal Code do not establish numeric maximum acceptable construction source noise levels at potentially affected receivers. To evaluate project construction noise impacts on sensitive receptors in the City of Menifee, the noise study utilized the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment criteria (FTA 2018). The FTA provides reasonable criteria for assessing construction noise impacts based on the potential for adverse community reaction. For residential uses, the daytime noise threshold is 80 dBA Leq for an 8-hour period. Project construction would occur nearest to the single-family residences to the east and west of the project site. Over the course of a typical construction day, construction equipment would be located as close as 20 feet to the properties but would typically be located at an average distance farther away due to the nature of construction and the lot size of the project. Therefore, it is assumed that over the course of a typical construction day the construction equipment would operate at an average distance of 100 feet from the nearby single-family residences. At a distance of 100 feet, a dozer and a backhoe would generate a noise level of 72.4 dBA Leq (RCNM calculations are included in Appendix J). This would be below the FTA daytime threshold of 80 dBA Leq for an 8-hour period. The approximate 80 dBA Leq (8 hour) noise contour for project construction would be 35 feet (i.e., if construction averages 35 feet or greater throughout an 8-hour construction day, it would not exceed the FTA threshold). In addition, construction would not occur between the Municipal Code prohibited hours of 7 p.m. and 6:30 a.m., or on Sundays or national holidays. Therefore, impacts from construction equipment would be less than significant. Operational Noise: The proposed residences would be a new source of noise sources that may be audible at adjacent properties, which are developed with single-family residences and a church. These receivers may periodically be subject to noise from stationary noise from HVAC, the emergency generator and transformer of the lift station, and increased traffic noise from project vehicles. Assumptions for modeling these sources are provided in the Noise and Vibration Study (Appendix J). The noise study was modeled using the lift station; however, it is currently assumed that the lift station would not be included in the project. The Noise and Vibration Study modeled operational noise at 18 sensitive receptor points in the residential neighborhoods to the east and west of the project site and the church to the west of the project site. As shown in Table 14, noise levels would not exceed City noise limits from stationary sources. Noise levels from project operation would result in less than significant impacts. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 65 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Table 10 Operational Noise Levels at Off-site Receivers Receiver Description dBA Leq Exceed Exterior Threshold?2 Exceed Interior Threshold?3 HVAC Exterior Lift Station Exterior Combined Exterior Combined Interior1 OFF1 Pitman Lane Residence 27 32 33 23 No No OFF2 Pitman Lane Residence 28 33 35 25 No No OFF3 Pitman Lane Residence 30 35 36 26 No No OFF4 Pitman Lane Residence 30 38 38 28 No No OFF5 Pitman Lane Residence 30 41 41 31 No No OFF6 Church 28 40 40 30 No No OFF7 Lamtarra Loop Residence 32 25 33 23 No No OFF8 Lamtarra Loop Residence 35 26 35 25 No No OFF9 Lamtarra Loop Residence 34 22 34 24 No No OFF10 Lamtarra Loop Residence 32 20 33 23 No No OFF11 Lamtarra Loop Residence 33 23 34 24 No No OFF12 Lamtarra Loop Residence 33 25 33 23 No No OFF13 Lamtarra Loop Residence 32 23 32 22 No No OFF14 Lamtarra Loop Residence 30 21 31 21 No No OFF15 Lamtarra Loop Residence 31 22 31 21 No No OFF16 Lamtarra Loop Residence 30 25 32 22 No No OFF17 Lamtarra Loop Residence 30 24 31 21 No No OFF18 Lamtarra Loop Residence 28 24 30 20 No No 1 Due to the older age of the adjacent residential structures, it is conservatively assumed that the exterior to interior noise attenuation from the architectural materials would be 10 dBA (as opposed to the estimated 25 dBA reduction from modern architectural materials assumed for project buildings). 2 The applicable exterior threshold is 65 dBA Leq (10-minute) from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and 45 dBA Leq (10-minute) from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 3 The applicable interior threshold is 55 dBA Leq (10-minute) from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and 40 dBA Leq (10-minute) from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 66 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Traffic Noise: Noise levels affecting the project site would be primarily influenced by traffic noise from Scott Road. Future noise levels affecting the compatibility of the project site were estimated using the FHWA’s Traffic Noise Model (TNM) traffic noise-reference levels and SoundPLAN. Traffic noise-model inputs to SoundPLAN include the three- dimensional coordinates of the roadways, noise receivers, and topographic features or planned barriers that would affect noise propagation; vehicle volumes and speeds, by type of vehicle; and absorption factors. Traffic volumes used for the noise analysis are shown in Table 15. The traffic counts used average daily trips (ADT) information provided in the project’s Traffic Study Report (STC Traffic 2020). Table 11 Existing and Future Traffic Volumes Traffic Counts (Average Daily Trips) Roadway Existing Existing + Project 2021 Opening Year 2021 Opening Year + Project Scott Road between Mira Street and Lindenberger Road 19,185 19,270 28,055 28,140 Scott Road between Lindenberger Road and Menifee Road 19,578 20,677 28,339 29,438 Scott Road between Antelope Road and Menifee Road 21,536 22,550 30,970 31,984 Scott Road between I-215 NB Ramps and Antelope Road 34,461 35,475 44,300 45,314 Scott Road between I-215 SB Ramps and I-215 Ramps 25,270 26,284 33,541 34,555 Source: STC Traffic 2020 The posted speed limit on Scott Road is 55 miles per hour. To determine the vehicle classification mix for modeling, the observed mix from the site measurement on Scott Road was used, which observed 97 percent automobiles, 2 percent medium trucks, and 1 percent heavy trucks. Peak hour traffic was assumed to be approximately 10 percent of the roadway’s total ADT in the model as 10 percent peak hour traffic noise level is considered equivalent to CNEL. Exterior traffic noise levels at the residential building facades of potential first and second floors were calculated, with the first floor receivers placed at 3 feet above ground level (in accordance with standard practice in the County of Riverside) and second floor receivers placed at approximately 13 feet above ground level. The project would generate new vehicle trips that would increase noise levels on nearby roadways. These trips would occur primarily on Scott Road. As discussed above, project traffic would have a relatively minor increase to existing traffic or opening year (2021) traffic, with traffic increases as high as approximately five percent. This would increase traffic noise along Scott Road by approximately 0.2 dBA. Therefore, the project’s traffic noise increase would not exceed the 3 dBA criteria for off-site traffic noise impacts and impacts would be less than significant. Noise levels at the project’s individual lots closest to Scott Road were modeled as part of the Noise and Vibration Study (Appendix J). The receivers were placed at a portion of the lot closest to Scott Road to represent potential exterior and building façade areas on each lot with the highest noise levels. Building façade noise levels were modeled at ground-level and at the potential second floors of the residences, as shown in Table 16 as Receivers ON1 through ON11 and ON13 through ON69, and shared exterior use areas DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 67 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 are shown as ON12, ON70, and ON71. As shown in Table 12, exterior noise levels from traffic noise at the potential outdoor areas of each residence and the project’s shared outdoor areas would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL. Therefore, noise levels at exterior areas of project residences would not exceed the City’s 60 dBA CNEL normally acceptable exterior noise standard and would not conflict with the City General Plan. Standard construction techniques for wood-frame construction buildings required under the California Building Code typically achieve a minimum 25-dBA reduction from exterior sources at interior locations when the windows are in a closed position. Therefore, if building façade noise levels exceeded 70 dBA CNEL for the residences, interior noise levels for the project would potentially exceed the City’s interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. As shown in Table 16, while building façade noise levels do not exceed 70 dBA CNEL at the potential 1st story locations of the residences, building façade noise levels would potentially exceed 70 dBA CNEL at the second story of residences closest to Scott Road. Lots that exceed 70 dBA CNEL are marked on Figure 5 in the Noise Study (Appendix J). Interior noise levels at these lots would potentially conflict with the City’s interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. Table 12 Traffic Noise Levels Noise Level (dBA CNEL) Receiver Description Ground Level/ 1st Floor 2nd Floor Exceed Exterior Threshold Exceed Interior Threshold ON1 Project Residence 59 65 No No ON2 Project Residence 59 71 No Yes ON3 Project Residence 59 71 No Yes ON4 Project Residence 59 71 No Yes ON5 Project Residence 60 71 No Yes ON6 Project Residence 60 71 No Yes ON7 Project Residence 60 71 No Yes ON8 Project Residence 59 71 No Yes ON9 Project Residence 59 67 No No ON10 Project Residence 59 66 No No ON11 Project Residence 59 71 No Yes ON12 Outdoor Area 60 N/A No N/A ON13 Project Residence 59 71 No Yes ON14 Project Residence 56 66 No No ON15 Project Residence 56 63 No No ON16 Project Residence 56 62 No No ON17 Project Residence 56 64 No No ON18 Project Residence 57 71 No Yes ON19 Project Residence 57 72 No Yes ON20 Project Residence 59 72 No Yes ON21 Project Residence 58 72 No Yes ON22 Project Residence 58 71 No Yes ON23 Project Residence 56 72 No Yes ON24 Project Residence 58 72 No Yes ON25 Project Residence 58 72 No Yes DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 68 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Noise Level (dBA CNEL) Receiver Description Ground Level/ 1st Floor 2nd Floor Exceed Exterior Threshold Exceed Interior Threshold ON26 Project Residence 58 72 No Yes ON27 Project Residence 58 72 No Yes ON28 Project Residence 59 72 No Yes ON29 Project Residence 60 67 No No ON30 Project Residence 57 63 No No ON31 Project Residence 56 61 No No ON32 Project Residence 55 59 No No ON33 Project Residence 54 58 No No ON34 Project Residence 53 59 No No ON35 Project Residence 52 59 No No ON36 Project Residence 53 58 No No ON37 Project Residence 54 58 No No ON38 Project Residence 54 57 No No ON39 Project Residence 54 57 No No ON40 Project Residence 51 59 No No ON41 Project Residence 51 59 No No ON42 Project Residence 53 58 No No ON43 Project Residence 53 57 No No ON44 Project Residence 53 57 No No ON45 Project Residence 54 57 No No ON46 Project Residence 53 61 No No ON47 Project Residence 54 62 No No ON48 Project Residence 56 59 No No ON49 Project Residence 57 61 No No ON50 Project Residence 55 59 No No ON51 Project Residence 56 60 No No ON52 Project Residence 58 64 No No ON53 Project Residence 58 63 No No ON54 Project Residence 57 61 No No ON55 Project Residence 56 60 No No ON56 Project Residence 59 64 No No ON57 Project Residence 58 62 No No ON58 Project Residence 58 61 No No ON59 Project Residence 57 60 No No ON60 Project Residence 54 61 No No ON61 Project Residence 52 60 No No ON62 Project Residence 55 59 No No ON63 Project Residence 54 59 No No ON64 Project Residence 54 58 No No ON65 Project Residence 53 58 No No ON66 Project Residence 58 62 No No ON67 Project Residence 56 60 No No DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 69 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Noise Level (dBA CNEL) Receiver Description Ground Level/ 1st Floor 2nd Floor Exceed Exterior Threshold Exceed Interior Threshold ON68 Project Residence 55 59 No No ON69 Project Residence 54 58 No No ON70 Outdoor Area 43 N/A No N/A ON71 Outdoor Area 48 N/A No N/A See Figure 5 of Appendix J for receiver locations and residences that would potentially exceed the City’s interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. Therefore, mitigation measure NOI-1 would be required to ensure compatibility with the City’s interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. With implementation of mitigation measure NOI-1, impacts would be less than significant. b): Less than Significant. Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment and methods used, distance to the affected structures and soil type. It is expected that ground-borne vibration from project construction activities would cause only intermittent, localized intrusion. Construction activities known to generate excessive ground-borne vibration, such as pile driving, would not be conducted by the project. The greatest anticipated source of vibration during general project construction activities would be from a dozer, which may be used within 20 feet of the nearest off-site residential structures to the east and west, when accounting for setbacks. A dozer would create approximately 0.089 in/sec PPV at a distance of 25 feet (Caltrans 2013b). This would equal a vibration level of 0.11 in/sec PPV at a distance of 20 feet. This would be lower than what is considered a distinctly perceptible impact for humans of 0.24 in/sec PPV and the structural damage impact to residential structures of 0.2 in/sec PPV. Therefore, although a dozer may be perceptible to nearby human receptors, temporary impacts associated with the dozer (and other potential equipment) would be less than significant. Operation of the project would not include any substantial vibration sources. Therefore, operational vibration impacts would be less than significant. c): Less than Significant. The airport nearest to the project site, the French Valley Airport, is located approximately 4.5 miles to the south. The project would not be located within the noise contours of the airport (Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 2004). Therefore, no substantial noise exposure from airport noise would occur to construction workers, users, or employees of the project, and no impacts would occur. Conditions of Approval: COA N-1 Prior to approval of grading plans and/or issuance of building permits, plans shall include a note indicating that noise-generating Project construction activities shall only occur Monday through Saturday, except nationally recognized holidays, 6:30 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. (City of Menifee Municipal Code, 9.210.060(c)). The Project construction supervisor shall ensure compliance with the note and the City shall conduct periodic inspection at its discretion. COA N-2 During all Project site construction, the construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers’ standards. The construction contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receptors nearest the Project site. COA N-3 The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receivers nearest the Project site (i.e., to the west or center) during all Project construction. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 70 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 COA N-4 The construction contractor shall limit haul truck deliveries to the same hours specified for construction equipment (Monday through Saturday, except nationally recognized holidays, 6:30 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.). The contractor shall design delivery routes to minimize the exposure of sensitive land uses or residential dwellings to delivery truck-related noise. Mitigation Measures: NOI-1 Exterior-to-Interior Noise Level Analysis. For residential units where exterior noise levels exceed 70 dBA CNEL (as shown on Figure 5 of Appendix J), coordinate with the project architects and other contractors to ensure compliance with the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise level standard. This will be achieved through additional exterior-to-interior noise analysis once specific building plan information is available. The information in the analysis should include wall heights and lengths, room volumes, window and door tables typical for a building plan, as well as information on any other openings in the building shell. With this specific building plan information, the analysis should determine the predicted interior noise levels at the planned on- site buildings. If predicted noise levels are found to be in excess of the applicable limit, the report should identify architectural materials or techniques that could be included to reduce noise levels to the applicable limit. Building permits for residential units where noise levels exceed 70 dBA CNEL shall not be issued until the City has confirmed that such residential units include noise reduction techniques to ensure compliance with the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise level standard. Possible noise reduction techniques include: • Windows and sliding glass doors would be mounted in low air infiltration rate frames (0.5 cubic feet per minute or less, per ANSI specifications). • Exterior doors would have a solid core with perimeter weather-stripping and threshold seals with a Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of at least 31, with the potential for STC rating of 36 or higher if necessary. • Exterior walls would include minimum of 5/8-inch of stucco or brick veneer over a minimum 1/2-inch plywood or OSB shear panel, R11 insulation and interior 5/8-inch gypsum board. • Walls would have a STC rating of at least 46. • Dual-paned windows would be installed with a STC rating of at least 31, with the potential for STC rating of 36 or higher if necessary. • If exterior sliding glass doors are included, high-performance glazing would be installed with a minimum STC rating of 36. • Air conditioning or mechanical ventilation systems would be installed to allow windows and doors to remain closed for extended intervals of time so that acceptable interior noise levels can be maintained. The mechanical ventilation system would meet the criteria of the International Building Code (Chapter 12, Section 1203.3 of the 2001 California Building Code). DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 71 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? X b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X Sources: Department of Finance E-5 Estimates, Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Adopted 2016 RTP/SCS Growth Forecast Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: a): Less than Significant. The project would result in the development of 175 single-family swelling units. According to the Department of Finance, the City of Menifee has a population of 93,452 as of 2019 (DOF 2019). The SCAG Regional Transportation/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) Adopted Growth Forecast projects an estimate population of 121,100 by the year 2040 (SCAG 2016). The project could result in an increase of approximately 515 residents. This increase in population is within the growth assumptions estimated by SCAG for the City of Menifee, thus will not be substantially growth inducing. More so, the project would accommodate population growth already predicted within SCAG’s forecasts. No new expanded infrastructure is proposed that could accommodate additional growth in the area that is not already possible with existing infrastructure. Impacts would be less than significant. b): No Impacts. The project site is currently vacant. Therefore, the project would not displace existing housing or people, creating the need to construction replacement housing elsewhere. No impacts would occur. Conditions of Approval: None Mitigation Measures: None DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 72 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 XV. PUBLIC SERVICES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? X b) Police protection? X c) Schools? X d) Parks? X e) Other public facilities? X Sources: Menifee General Plan Safety Element; Menifee Union School District and Perris Union High School District Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal S-4: A community that has effective fire mitigation and response measures in place, and as a result is minimally impacted by wildland and structure fires. Policy S-4.1: Require fire-resistant building construction materials, the use of vegetation control methods, and other construction and fire prevention features to reduce the hazard of wildland fire. Policy S-4.2: Ensure, to the maximum extent possible, that fire services, such as firefighting equipment and personnel, infrastructure, and response times, are adequate for all sections of the City. Policy S-4.4: Review development proposals for impacts to fire facilities and compatibility with fire areas or mitigate. Goal OSC-1: A comprehensive system of high quality parks and recreation programs that meets the diverse needs of the community. Policy OSC-1.7: Ensure that parks and recreational facilities are well-maintained by the responsible agency. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: a): Less than Significant. The Riverside County Fire Department provides fire protection and emergency response services in the City of Menifee. Station No. 68 located at 26020 Wickerd Road is approximately 4 miles west of the project site and would likely be the station to serve the project. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 73 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 The project is located within the existing service area of the Riverside County Fire Department. Prior to the issuance of building permits all construction documents will be reviewed and approved by the City of Menifee’s Fire Department as contracted through CalFire for consistency with the Uniform Fire Code. The development will be required to provide fully operational fire suppression equipment including hydrants prior to the arrival of any building material being delivered to the Project site. The proposed structures will have fire sprinklers throughout the buildings as well as a dedicated fire protection water line. The new construction of residential housing will not cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for the fire services. Per Menifee Municipal Code Chapter 8.02 (Development Impact Fees), new development is required to pay impact fees that can go toward purchasing land and construction of new fire facilities. Therefore, additional residential development into this area will not create a significant effect upon or result in a need for new or altered fire service. Any impacts are considered less than significant impact. b): Less than Significant. The City of Menifee Police Department has 60 officers and 17 professional staff. The Menifee Police Department is located at 29714 Haun Roadin Menifee, approximately 3.6 miles northwest of the proposed project site. No new or expanded police facilities will need to be constructed as a result of this project. Per Menifee Municipal Code Chapter 8.02 (Development Impact Fees), new development is required to pay impact fees that can go toward purchasing land and construction of new police service facilities. The proposed project’s impacts with respect to police services would be less than significant. c): Less than Significant. The proposed project is located within the Menifee Union School District and Perris Union High School District. The expansion of public services such as schools, libraries, or parks will not be required. The proposed project is subject to development fees for school facilities pursuant to Senate Bill 50. Therefore, a less than significant impact on local schools or parks are anticipated. d): Less than Significant. Demand for park and recreational facilities typically result from residential development. The proposed project will generate residents, but will also provide on-site recreational facilities. The project will include approximately 0.21-acre pocket park space with tot lot as well as a 5.42-acre passive open space with a looping trail, with recreational amenities including a passive walking trail and pocket park with tot lot. While the project’s residents would likely utilize off-site park facilities as well, most recreational demands will be met on site. Additionally, the California Quimby Act authorizes the City of Menifee to require the dedication of land or to impose fees for park or recreational purposes as a condition of the approval, which is imposed per Menifee Municipal Code Chapter 8.02. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. e): Less than Significant. As discussed above, the project would result in growth of approximately 515 residents. This increase is within the SCAG projections for Menifee and is insignificant to the area. The expansion of public services such as libraries or hospitals will not be required. The proposed development will not significantly increase the demand of such services. Impacts would be less than significant. Conditions of Approval: None Mitigation Measures: None DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 74 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 XVI. RECREATION Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? X b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? X Sources: Menifee General Plan Draft EIR (2013); Menifee General Plan (2013); City of Menifee Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan (2016). Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal OSC-1: A comprehensive system of high-quality parks and recreation programs that meets the diverse needs of the community. Policy OSC-1.1: Provide parks and recreational programs to meet the varied needs of community residents, including children, youth, adults, seniors, and persons with disabilities, and make these facilities and services easily accessible and affordable to all users. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: a): Less than Significant. The project includes residential development that will create demand for park and recreational facilities. Although the project would result in approximately 515 residents, parkland and other recreational facilities will be provided as part of the project as discussed in Section XV(d). As specified within the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 8.02, the City requires dedication of land for park or recreation facilities, or payment of fees in-lieu thereof, incident to and as a condition of approval for a tentative map. According to the Menifee General Plan, the City has a standard of five acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, and the City’s Municipal Code specifies that land dedication or fees shall be at the rate of five acres per 1,000 residents. Payment of fees or dedication of parkland would reduce potential impacts of the use of recreational facilities in the City from the increase in population created by the project. In addition, the project proposes the open space and recreation areas discussed in Section XV(d), which would be utilized by residents in the proposed development and reduce the use of other recreational facilities in the City. The proposed project, therefore, will not generate substantial demand for new or expanded park facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Impacts would be less than significant. b): Less than Significant. The project includes the previously discussed on-site active and passive recreational facilities whose potential adverse physical effects on the environment have been considered in conjunction with the rest of the project. Due to these on-site facilities, the construction or expansion of off-site recreational facilities will not be required. Impacts would be less than significant. Conditions of Approval: None DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 75 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Mitigation Measures: None DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 76 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 XVII. TRANSPORTATION -- Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with a program , plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilties ? X b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, Subdivision (b)? X c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? X d) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? X e) Result in inadequate emergency access? X Sources: Menifee General Plan Circulation Element; Menifee Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines (2019), Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Travelled (2020), STC Traffic Impact Analysis, March 2020 (Appendix K) and VMT Analysis, July 2020 (Appendix L). Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal C-1: A roadway network that meets the circulation needs of all residents, employees, and visitors to the City of Menifee. Policy C-1.1: Require roadways to: • Comply with federal, state and local design and safety standards. • Meet the needs of multiple transportation modes and users. • Be compatible with the streetscape and surrounding land uses. • Be maintained in accordance with best practices. Policy C-1.2: Require development to mitigate its traffic impacts and achieve a peak hour Level of Service (LOS) D or better at intersections, except at constrained intersections at close proximity to the I- 215 where LOS E may be permitted. Policy C-1.5: Minimize idling times and vehicle miles traveled to conserve resources, protect air quality, and limit greenhouse gas emissions. Goal C-2: A bikeway and community pedestrian network that facilitates and encourages nonmotorized travel throughout the City of Menifee. Policy C-2.1: Require on- and off-street pathways to: • Comply with federal, state and local design and safety standards. • Meet the needs of multiple types of users (families, commuters, recreational beginners, exercise DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 77 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 experts) and meet ADA standards and guidelines. • Be compatible with the streetscape and surrounding land uses. • Be maintained in accordance with best practices. Policy C-2.2: Provide off-street multipurpose trails and on-street bike lanes as our primary paths of citywide travel, and explore the shared use of low speed roadways for connectivity wherever it is safe to do so. Policy C-2.3: Require walkways that promote safe and convenient travel between residential areas, businesses, schools, parks, recreation areas, transit facilities, and other key destination points. Policy C-2.4: Explore opportunities to expand the pedestrian and bicycle networks; this includes consideration of utility easements, drainage corridors, road rights-of-way and other potential options. Goal C-3: A public transit system that is a viable alternative to automobile travel and meets basic transportation needs of the transit dependent. Policy C-3.2: Require new development to provide transit facilities, such as bus shelters, transit bays, and turnouts, as necessary. Goal C-4: Diversified local transportation options that include neighborhood electric vehicles and golf carts. Policy C-4.1: Encourage the use of neighborhood electric vehicles and golf carts instead of automobiles for local trips. Goal C-5: An efficient flow of goods through the City that maximizes economic benefits and minimizes negative impacts. Policy C-5.3: Support efforts to reduce/eliminate the negative environmental impacts of goods movement Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: a): Less Than Significant Impact A Traffic Impact Analysis for Vehicle Miles Travelled was also produced in the form of a technical memo justifying the project’s exemption from further VMT analysis. The document was prepared in accordance with the City of Menifee Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled (June 2020). Based upon this technical memo, the 2012 daily total VMT per service population for the project’s traffic analysis zone is 33.82, and is lower than the 35.68 county VMT per service population threshold. Therefore, it can be concluded that the project site is located within a low VMT area and no further analysis is required. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was also prepared by STC Traffic (dated March 24, 2020) to assess project- related level of service (LOS) impacts. The purpose of this TIA was to evaluate the potential circulation system deficiencies that may result from the development of the proposed project and recommend improvements to achieve acceptable circulation system operational conditions. The TIA was prepared in accordance with the City of Menifee Public Works Department Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines (2019). Due to CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, LOS impacts no longer can be considered a significant impact under CEQA. Thus, the TIA and below analysis were prepared to comply with City of Menifee General Plan policies. The traffic impact analysis evaluated ten intersections in the vicinity of the project site: DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 78 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 1. Briggs Road/ Scott Road 2. Mira Street/ Scott Road 3. Lamtarra Loop / Barton Banks Street 4. Lindenberger Road / Scott Road 5. Pitman Lane / Eagle Road (Future Project Intersection only) 6. Menifee Road / Eagle Road 7. Menifee Road / Scott Road 8. Antelope Road / Scott Road 9. I-215 Northbound Ramps / Scott Road 10. I-215 Southbound Ramps / Scott Road The TIA also includes a peak hour roadway segment analysis for the following four segments where the Project is anticipated to contribute 50 or more peak hour trips: 1. Scott Rd between Mira St and Lindenberger Road 2. Scott Rd between Lindenberger Rd and Menifee Road 3. Scott Rd between Antelope Road and Menifee Road 4. Scott Road between Antelope Road and I-215 Northbound Ramps 5. Scott Road between I-215 Northbound Ramps and Southbound Ramps Thresholds of Significance Pursuant to City of Menifee General Plan policies, a potentially significant impact to area intersections would occur if: • An intersection is projected to operate at an acceptable level of service (i.e., LOS D or better) under Existing traffic conditions and the addition of project traffic, as measured by 50 or more peak hour trips, is expected to cause the intersection to operate at an unacceptable level of service (i.e., LOS E or F); or • An intersection is projected to operate at LOS E or LOS F under Existing, and the project would add 50 or more peak hour trips Project Trip Generation Trip generation rates used to estimate Project traffic are based upon data collected by the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) for single family dwelling units, land uses in their published Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition. Table 17 shows the project trip generation. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 79 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Table 13 Project Trip Generation Land Use Unit Daily (per unit) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Total Inbound Outbound Total Inbound Outbound (% AM) (% AM) (% PM) (% PM) Trip Generation Rates Single Family Dwelling 1 9.44 0.74 25% 75% 0.99 63% 37% Project Trip Generation Single Family Dwelling 179 1,690 132 33 99 178 112 66 Existing (2020) Conditions Table 18 shows intersection LOS under Existing (2020) conditions. All intersections operate at acceptable LOS D or better during the existing peak hours both with and without the project. Table 14 Intersection Level of Service under Existing (2020) Conditions Study Intersection Control Peak Hour Existing Conditions Without Project With Project Delay LOS Delay LOS 1 Briggs Road/ Scott Road Signal AM 13.2 B 13.3 B PM 14.3 B 14.6 D 2 Mira Street/ Scott Road SSS AM 11.7 B 12.3 B PM 11.0 B 11.6 B 3 Lamtarra Loop / Barton Banks Street SSS AM 8.5 A 8.5 A PM 8.4 A 8.4 A 4 Lindenberger Road / Scott Road Signal AM 5.5 A 11.6 B PM 5.2 A 11.9 B 5 Pitman Lane / Eagle Road SSS AM Future Project Intersection 8.6 A PM 8.4 A 6 Menifee Road / Eagle Road SSS AM 17.8 C 23.8 C PM 18.6 C 21.6 C 7 Menifee Road / Scott Road Signal AM 30.2 C 32.3 C PM 32.2 C 34.4 C 8 Antelope Road / Scott Road Signal AM 50.4 D 54.1 D PM 45.2 D 47.8 D 9 I-215 Northbound Ramps / Scott Road Signal AM 28.2 C 29.7 C PM 33.7 C 40.1 D 10 I-215 Southbound Ramps / Scott Road Signal AM 37.2 D 37.6 D PM 41.9 D 43.6 D Table 19 shows all study roadway segments operate at acceptable LOS D or better during the peak hours under existing conditions with and without the project with the exception of the following roadway segment: DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 80 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 • Scott Road between I-215 NB Ramps and Antelope Road V/C Ratio LOS F The project is forecast to assign more than 50 peak hour trips in both the AM and PM peak hours on the above roadway segment. However, as shown in the intersection analysis the intersections at either end of the segment which control the traffic flow are expected to operate at acceptable levels so further mitigation is not required. Table 15 Existing Roadway Daily Segment LOS Summary Segment Existing Conditions Existing + Project Conditions Classification & Capacity ADT V/C Ratio LOS Classification & Capacity ADT V/C Ratio LOS Scott Road between Mira Street & Lindenberger Road 4D 37,000 19,185 0.519 C 4D 37,000 19,270 0.521 C Scott Road between Lindenberger Road & Menifee Road 4D 37,000 19,578 0.529 C 4D 37,000 20,677 0.559 C Scott Road between Antelope Road and Menifee Road 4D 37,000 21,536 0.582 C 4D 37,000 22,550 0.609 C Scott Road between I-215 NB Ramps & Antelope Road 3D 25,600 34,461 1.346 F 3D 25,600 35,475 1.386 F Scott Road between I-215 SB Ramps & I-215 NB Ramps 4D 37,000 25,270 0.683 C 4D 37,000 26,284 0.710 C Opening Year Cumulative (2021) Conditions Table 20 shows intersection LOS under Opening Year (2021) conditions with and without the project. Both scenarios include cumulative development. All study intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable LOS D or better during the peak hours under 2021 opening year conditions both without and with the project Table 16 2021 Opening Year Intersection LOS Summary Study Intersection Control Peak Hour 2021 Opening Year Without Project With Project Delay LOS Delay LOS 1 Briggs Road/ Scott Road Signal AM 14.3 B 14.6 B PM 17.0 B 17.4 B 2 Mira Street/ Scott Road SSS AM 15.3 C 16.6 C PM 13.2 B 14.3 C 3 Lamtarra Loop / Barton Banks Street SSS AM 8.5 A 8.5 A PM 8.4 A 8.4 A 4 Lindenberger Road / Scott Road Signal AM 5.6 A 12.6 B PM 5.2 A 12.6 B 5 Pitman Lane / Eagle Road SSS AM Future Project Intersection 8.6 A PM 8.4 A 6 Menifee Road / Eagle Road SSS AM 18.2 C 24.6 C PM 18.9 C 22.2 C 7 Menifee Road / Scott Road Signal AM 45.3 D 50.2 D DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 81 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 PM 47.9 D 54.2 D 8 Antelope Road / Scott Road Signal AM 38.5 D 39.5 D PM 40.6 D 40.9 D 9 I-215 Northbound Ramps / Scott Road Signal AM 19.7 B 20.0 C PM 22.5 C 24.6 C 10 I-215 Southbound Ramps / Scott Road Signal AM 11.6 B 11.6 B PM 17.3 B 17.6 B Table 21 shows that all study roadway segments are expected to operate under acceptable levels of service based on 2021 opening year geometries, with the exception of the following: • Scott Rd between Antelope Road and Menifee Road– LOS F • Scott Road between I-215 SB Ramps & I-215 NB Ramps – LOS E Table 17 Opening Year Daily Segment LOS Summary Segment Opening Year (2021) Conditions Opening Year (2021) With Project Conditions Classification & Capacity ADT V/C Ratio LOS Classification & Capacity ADT V/C Ratio LOS Scott Road between Mira Street & Lindenberger Road 4D 37,000 28,055 0.758 D 4D 34,100 28,140 0.825 D Scott Road between Lindenberger Road & Menifee Road 4D 37,000 28,339 0.766 D 4D 34,100 29,438 0.863 D Scott Road between Antelope Road and Menifee Road 4D 37,000 30,970 0.837 D 4D 37,000 31,984 0.864 D Scott Road between I-215 NB Ramps & Antelope Road 4D 37,000 44,300 1.197 F 4D 37,000 45,314 1.225 F Scott Road between I-215 SB Ramps & I-215 NB Ramps 4D 37,000 33,541 0.907 E 4D 37,000 34,555 0.934 E The forecast increase in project trips to the following roadway segments would exceed the 50-trip threshold: • Scott Road between I-215 NB Ramps and Antelope Road – LOS F • Scott Road between I-215 SB Ramps and I-215 NB Ramps – LOS E The project is forecast to add more than 50 trips on the above roadway segments. Therefore, the project would result in significant impact at the above listed roadway segments under opening year without and with project conditions. No mitigation is recommended for the above segments as the intersections at either end of the segments control the traffic flow and are forecast to operate at acceptable LOS D or better during the opening year with and without project conditions. General Plan policies require development to mitigate its traffic impacts and achieve a peak hour Level of Service (LOS) D or better at intersections not roadway segments. Considering intersections before and after the aforementioned operate at LOS D, it can be considered a less than significant impact that the roadway segments operate below LOS D. b): Less Than Significant Impact. The Congestion Management Program (CMP) in effect in Riverside County was approved by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) in 2011. All freeways and selected arterial roadways in the County are designated elements of the CMP system of highways and DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 82 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 roadways. There are two CMP system roadways in the City, I-215 and SR-74. Only the I-215 is within the project study area. RCTC has adopted a minimum Level of Service threshold of LOS “E” for CMP facilities. Although, the CMP indicates that I-215 in the Menifee area had a LOS “D” in 2011, the Riverside County Congestion Management Program indicates that I-215 is "exempt" from CMP requirements in accordance with CMP Statutes because this facility (roadway segments or intersections) had an LOS "F" in 1991. As discussed under Impact XVI.a, above, the project would not cause any freeway mainline segments of I-215 to fall below the LOS D standard. c): No Impact. The Perris Valley Airport is a private airport that is located 9.5 miles northeast of the project site, thus no impacts related to hazards associated with this airport would occur. Additionally, the French Valley Airport, located approximately 4.5 miles southeast would impose no hazards that are associated with this airport. The project site is located outside the Perris Valley Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan as well as the French Valley Airport Compatibility Plan. Since the property project is outside of the airport influence area where safety concerns exist, the proposed project would not pose a safety hazard. The project site is not located within the Perris Valley Airport Influence Area and would not affect air traffic volume or patterns. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant d-e): Less Than Significant Impact. The TIA prepared for the project includes recommendations for on-site and site-adjacent roadway and site access improvements to ensure that project driveway intersections and internal circulation are safe, with adequate sight distance and driveway widths where necessary for entering and exiting the site. The proposed project is required to comply with Fire Department requirements for adequate access. Project site access and circulation will provide adequate access and turning radius for emergency vehicles, consistent with the Fire Department’s requirements, upon implementation of recommendations contained in the TIA. Implementation of these recommendations will also prevent any project impacts due to a design feature. The project site is surrounded by residential land uses to the south, east and west, religious land use to the south-west and vacant land to the north. The proposed project will not create hazards due to incompatible uses. Emergency access to the site will be maintained during construction. f): Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project will not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. The project will make site-adjacent roadway improvements consistent with City of Menifee General Plan Cross Sections. Sidewalk improvements developed by the project will be utilized by pedestrians. The project will be served by these existing and proposed transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities; however, the project will not decrease their performance or safety. Impacts will be less than significant. Conditions of Approval: None Mitigation Measures: None DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 83 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 XVIII. Tribal Cultural Resources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a Cultural Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or X b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. X Sources: Menifee General Plan; First Carbon Solutions (FCS) Phase 1 Cultural Resources Assessment (FCS 2019) Appendix D; Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal OSC-5: Archaeological, historical, and cultural resources that are protected and integrated into the City's built environment. Policy OSC-5.1: Preserve and protect significant archeological, historic, and cultural sites, places, districts, structures, landforms, objects and native burial sites, and other features, such as Ringing Rock and Grandmother Oak, consistent with state law. Policy OSC-5.2: Work with local schools, organizations, the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians, Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians, and other agencies to educate the public about the rich archeological, historic, and cultural resources found in the City. Policy OSC-5.3: Preserve sacred sites identified by the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians and Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians, such as tribal burial grounds, by avoiding activities that would negatively impact the sites. Policy OSC-5.4: Enhance local interest, pride, and sense of place for City residents by making locally recovered artifacts more easily accessible to students, researchers, and the interested public. Policy OSC-5.5: Establish clear and responsible practices to identify, evaluate, and protect previously unknown archeological, historic, and cultural sites, following CEQA and NEPA procedure. Policy OSC-5.6: Maintain active communication and coordination with the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians and Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 84 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 a-b): Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Also please see Section V, Cultural Resources. Assembly Bill (AB) 52 specifies that a project that may cause a substantial adverse change to a defined Tribal Cultural Resource (TCR) may result in a significant effect on the environment. AB 52 requires tribes interested in development projects within a traditionally and culturally affiliated geographic area to notify a lead agency of such interest and to request notification of future projects subject to CEQA prior to determining if a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or environmental impact report is required for a project. The lead agency is then required to notify the tribe within 14 days of deeming a development application subject to CEQA complete to notify the requesting tribe as an invitation to consult on the project. AB 52 identifies examples of mitigation measures that will avoid or minimize impacts to a TCR. The bill makes the above provisions applicable to projects that have a notice of preparation or a notice of intent to adopt a negative declaration/mitigated negative declaration circulated on or after July 1, 2015. AB 52 amends Sections 5097.94 and adds Sections 21073, 21074, 2108.3.1., 21080.3.2, 21082.3, 21083.09, 21084.2, and 21084.3 to the California Public Resources Code (PRC), relating to Native Americans. As part of the Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, a Sacred Lands File and Native American Contacts List Request was sent to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on September 9, 2018 (FCS 2019). The response from the NAHC was received September 11, 2018, and it noted that the records search was negative. A list of Native American tribal members affiliated with the project area who may have additional knowledge of the project area was included with the results. The tribal members were notified by mail on September 4, 2018, requesting additional information they might have concerning the project area. AB 52 notices were sent to the following four (4) Tribes: • Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians • Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians • Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians • Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Correspondence was received from Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians and Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians requesting formal consultation. Formal Consultation originated in February 2020 and concluded in July 2020. As discussed in Section V, Cultural Resources, standard conditions of approval would be implemented during ground disturbing activities to limit impacts to the existing milling stone located on the southern boundary of the project site and monitor for previously undiscovered cultural resources. In addition, Mitigation Measure CUL-8 would preserve the existing millingstone site in perpetuity by providing protective fencing around the site. These mitigation measures ensure that in the event that native cultural resources are discovered during ground-disturbing activities all construction activities around the find will be halted, a qualified archaeologist will be notified, uncovered resources will be evaluated, and local tribes will be notified if the find is determined to be prehistoric or historic in nature. Impacts to tribal cultural resources would be less than significant with implementation of Conditions of Approval CUL-1 through CUL-7 and Mitigation Measure CUL-8. Conditions of Approval: Refer to Conditions of Approval CUL-1 through CUL-7 in Section V, Cultural Resources. Mitigation Measures: CUL-8 (Archeological Work) Prior to any grading in the associated area, the Project Applicant shall meet with the project archaeologist and the Consulting Tribe(s) in order to assess Archaeological Site P-33- 013299 CA-RIV-007400 to determine boundaries of the site and to determine location for the ESA fencing during the grading activities for site protection. The Consulting Tribe(s) shall work with the Project archaeologist, Project Applicant, the Community Development Director and the grading contractor or appropriate personnel to ensure that a reasonable effort is made to preserve the Archeological Site and DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 85 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 inadvertently found features safely to an open space area (anticipated to be on the northwest portion of the project site) and to discuss the most-appropriate methods of relocation. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 86 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS -- Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? X b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? X c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? X d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? X e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? X Sources: Menifee General Plan; Eastern Municipal Water District Urban Water Management Plan; CalEEMod outputs (Appendix A); Southern California Gas (SCG) Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal LU-3: A full range of public utilities and related services that provide for the immediate and long- term needs of the community. Policy LU-3.1: Work with utility providers in the planning, designing, and siting of distribution and support facilities to comply with the standards of the General Plan and Development Code. Policy LU-3.2: Work with utility provides to increase service capacity as demand increases. Policy LU-3.3: Coordinate public infrastructure improvements through the City's Capital Improvement Program. Policy LU-3.4: Require that approval of new development be contingent upon the project's ability to secure appropriate infrastructure services. Policy LU-3.5: Facilitate the shared use of right-of-way, transmission corridors, and other appropriate measures to minimize the visual impact of utilities infrastructure throughout Menifee. Goal OSC-7: A reliable and safe water supply that effectively meets current and future user demands. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 87 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Policy OSC-7.2: Encourage water conservation as a means of preserving water resources. Policy OSC-7.4: Encourage the use of reclaimed water for the irrigation of parks, golf courses, public landscaped areas, and other feasible applications as service becomes available from the Eastern Municipal Water District. Policy OSC-7.5: Utilize a wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal system that adequately serves the existing and long-term needs of the community. Policy OSC-7.7: Maintain and improve existing level of sewer service by improving infrastructure and repairing existing deficiencies. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: a): Less than Significant. The Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) provides water service to the City of Menifee. EMWD has four sources of water supply: imported water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), local groundwater, desalinated groundwater, and recycled water. State Water Code § 10910-10915 require the preparation of a water supply assessment (WSA) demonstrating sufficient water supplies for any subdivision that involves the construction of more than 500 dwelling units, or the equivalent thereof. As the project is below the established thresholds, no WSA is required. In normal year, single dry year, and multiple dry year scenarios presented by the 2015 EMWD Urban Water Management Plan, supply will meet demand under the normal year, single dry year, and multiple dry year scenarios.1 EMWD is able to respond to supply shortages through implementation of its Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) and MWD’s Water Supply Allocation Plan (WSAP). Based on the CalEEMod assumptions, the proposed project’s estimated water demand is approximately 51.6 AFY. According to the UWMP projections, 2040 water demand in the city is anticipated to be 268,200 AFY and 2040 supply is 268,200 AFY under normal year conditions. Therefore, proposed project’s water demand would represent less than 0.1 percent of the City’s anticipated water demand in 2040. According to the General Plan EIR, there is sufficient supply to meet demand of General Plan buildout and impacts were determined to be less than significant. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and impacts related to water supply are consistent with those contemplated and analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Impacts will be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. Regarding wastewater facilities, as discussed above, wastewater generated at the project site is treated at the Perris Valley RWRF. The proposed project would generate minimal wastewater to be conveyed to the Perris Valley RWRF and would be well within the existing remaining treatment capacity of the Perris Valley RWRF. Connections to local water and sewer mains would involve temporary and less than significant construction impacts that would occur in conjunction with other on-site improvements. No additional improvements are needed to either sewer lines or treatment facilities to serve the proposed project. Standard connection fees will address any incremental impacts of the proposed project. Therefore, the project would be less than significant. Electrical service to the project site is provided by SCE, which maintains substations and transmission lines throughout southern California, including the Valley Substation approximately 6.4 miles north of the project site on Menifee Road. SCG provides natural gas service to the project site. There nearest transmission line is along El Centro Lane which connects to a high-pressure distribution line along Scott Road south of the project site. The project site is currently served by existing electricity and natural gas infrastructure along Scott Road and/or Lindenberger Road. As discussed in Section VI, the project would involve an increase in electricity and natural gas demand to serve the project; however, this demand increase would not be a wasteful use of DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 88 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 energy and is not anticipated to require additional electricity substations or natural gas storage/transmission facilities. Impacts with respect to new or expanded electric power or natural gas facilities would be less than significant. b): Less Than Significant. The project could result in significant impacts if the project required additional water supplies than are currently entitled. The proposed project is anticipated to demand 51.6 AFY. According to the City of Menifee General Plan EIR, the projected net increase in water demands by buildout of the General Plan, approximately 15.0 mgd, or 168,000 acre-feet per year, is within EMWD forecasts of increases in its water supplies over the 2015-2035 period. In addition, the EMWD 2015 UWMP projects adequate supply to meet demand under the normal year, single dry year, and multiple dry year scenarios. There are adequate forecast water supplies in the region for the proposed project, and no additional water supplies would be needed. c): Less than Significant. As detailed above, the proposed project would be adequately served by existing facilities. Thus, impacts would be less than significant. d-e): Less than Significant. Significant impacts could occur if the project would exceed the existing permitted landfill capacity or violates federal, state, and local statutes and regulations. Solid waste from Menifee is collected by Waste Management, Inc. (WMI). The City of Menifee utilizes three landfills: Badlands Sanitary Landfill, El Sobrante Landfill, and Lamb Canyon Sanitary Landfill. Badlands Sanitary Landfill has a maximum daily capacity of 4,800 tons per day and a maximum capacity of 34,400,000 cubic yards. The remaining capacity is 15,748,799 cubic yards and it is scheduled to cease operation in January 2022. El Sobrante Sanitary Landfill has a maximum daily capacity of 16,054 tons per day and a maximum capacity of 209,910,000 tons. The remaining capacity is 143,977,170 tons and it is scheduled to cease operation in January 2051. Lamb Canyon Landfill has a maximum daily capacity of 5,000 tons per day and a maximum capacity of 38,935,653 cubic yards. The remaining capacity is 19,242,950 cubic yards and it is scheduled to cease operation in April 2029. Compliance with County waste reduction programs and policies would reduce the volume of solid waste entering landfills. Individual development projects within the County would be required to comply with applicable state and local regulations, thus reducing the amount of landfill waste by at least 50 percent. According to CalRecycle, solid waste facilities serving Riverside County had a combined annual disposal limit surplus of 4,564,818 tons in 2015 and are projected to have a combined annual disposal limit surplus of 3,633,512 tons in the year 2025 (CalRecycle 2017). Combined remaining capacities at the landfills would be adequate to accommodate future development. The proposed project is estimated to generate approximately 211.2 tons of solid waste per year. Considering the availability of landfill capacity, project solid waste disposal needs can be adequately met without a significant impact on the capacity of the nearest and optional, more distant, landfills. The proposed project is required to comply with all applicable federal, state, County, and City statutes and regulations related to solid waste as a standard project condition of approval. Therefore, it is not expected that the proposed project would impact the City’s compliance with state-mandated (AB 939) waste diversion requirements. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. Conditions of Approval: None Mitigation Measures: None DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 89 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Sources: Menifee General Plan, Exhibit S-6, “High Fire Hazard Areas,” and Exhibit S-7, “Critical Facilities;” MGP Draft EIR; California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CALFIRE) Website - Riverside County City Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps (CALFIRE 2009). Applicable General Plan Policies: Policy S-5.2: Ensure that the fire department can continue to respond safely and effectively to a hazardous materials incident in the City, whether it is a spill at a permitted facility, or the result of an accident along a section of the freeway or railroads that extend across the City. Policy S-5.5: Require facilities that handle hazardous materials to implement mitigation measures that reduce the risks associated with hazardous material production, storage, and disposal. Goal S-6: A City that responds and recovers in an effective and timely manner from natural disasters such as flooding, fire, and earthquakes, and as a result is not impacted by civil unrest that may occur following a natural disaster. Policy S-6.1: Continuously review, update, and implement emergency preparedness, response, and recovery plans that make the best use of the City- and county-specific emergency management resources available. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: a-d): Less than Significant. According to Exhibit S-6 of the Menifee General Plan, the project site is not in a fire hazard zone (Menifee 2014). Certain areas adjacent to the east, north, and south of the project site are listed as high and very high fire hazard zones in the General Plan. According to FHSZ maps prepared by CALFIRE, the project site is not located in a FHSZ (CALFIRE 2009). The project would be subject to compliance with the California Fire Code and to regulations pertaining to fire protection within MMC Chapter 8.20. Due to the project site not being in an FHSZ and compliance with building and design regulations, the project would have a less than significant impact to wildfire risk. XX. Wildfire-- Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? X c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? X d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslopes or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? X DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 90 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Conditions of Approval: None Mitigation Measures: None DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 91 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impac t a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X Findings of Fact: The project site is currently undeveloped and consists of fallow land with annual grasses throughout and riparian, wetland, and vernal pool habitat located in the northern portion of the site. The project site is within the Sun City/Menifee Area Plan of the MSHCP but is not located within the MSHCP Criteria Area. The biologically sensitive northern portion of the project site would remain undeveloped and preserved as open space as part of the proposed project. The Biological Technical Report (Technical Report) concluded the proposed project would avoid impacts to important habitat, jurisdictional water features, and MSHCP riparian/riverine areas and vernal pools by leaving the northern portion of the site as open space (GLA 2020). In addition, the Technical Report concluded that the project site is not an important regional habitat linkage for wildlife movement. Conditions of Approval BIO-3 and BIO-4 provide for the preconstruction survey for burrowing owl and nesting birds in order to avoid any construction-related disturbances and would ensure that the proposed project has a less than significant impact on biological resources. As discussed under Section V Cultural Resources, the project site contains a previously recorded prehistoric millingstone feature and has high archaeological sensitivity but does not contain any historic resources. The project would implement Conditions of Approval CUL-1 through CUL-7 and Mitigation Measure CUL-8, which would preserve and protect the existing milling stone feature, require reburial of unearthed cultural resources, provide for construction monitoring by a Qualified Archaeologist and Native American tribal monitors, and provide direction regarding the finding of Native American human remains or associated grave goods. Condition of Approval GEO-1 would provide monitoring by a qualified Paleontological Monitor for excavations exceeding 5 feet in depth in native sedimentary to quickly and professionally recover any fossil remains discovered while not impeding development. In the event that previously undiscovered archaeological or paleontological resources are unearthed during project construction, construction in the area would halt and the Qualified Archaeologist or paleontologist would evaluate the find to determine whether the resource requires further study. There remains the potential for the project to encounter previously undiscovered cultural resources during ground disturbing activities. With implementation of standard conditions of approval and mitigation, impacts related to degradation of the environment and cultural resources will be less than significant. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? X DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 92 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Findings of Fact: Cumulative impacts can result from the interactions of environmental changes resulting from one proposed project with changes resulting from other past, present, and future projects that affect the same resources, utilities and infrastructure systems, public services, transportation network elements, air basin, watershed, or other physical conditions. Such impacts could be short-term and temporary, usually consisting of overlapping construction impacts, as well as long term, due to the permanent land use changes and operational characteristics involved with the project. Section 15130(b)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines identifies two methods to determine the scope of related projects for cumulative impact analysis: • List-of-Projects Method: a list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency. • Summary-of-Projections Method: a summary of projections contained in an adopted general plan or related planning document or in a prior environmental document that has been adopted or certified, which described or evaluated regional or area wide conditions contributing to the cumulative impact. Any such planning document shall be referenced and made available to the public at a location specified by the lead agency. The proposed project is consistent with the City of Menifee General Plan, AQMP, and the CMP. Therefore, cumulative impacts will be less than significant. The proposed project would incrementally contribute to cumulative impacts for projects occurring within the City. As concluded in Sections I through XX, the project would have no impact, a less than significant impact, or a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated, with respect to all environmental issues considered in this document. Therefore, these environmental topics would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact. Potentially significant impacts as a result of the project were identified for biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, noise, transportation, and tribal cultural resources. Cumulative impacts of several of these resource areas have been addressed in the individual resource sections, including, Noise, and Transportation (See CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3)). As discussed the project’s noise and vibration impacts due to construction and operation would be less than significant, and Mitigation Measure NOI-1 would ensure that interior noise levels at the new residences would comply with the City’s interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. The impact analyses in these sections use thresholds that already account for cumulative (regional) impacts. Other issues (e.g., biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, tribal cultural resources) are by their nature project-specific and impacts at one location do not add to impacts at other locations or create additive impacts. Therefore, impacts related to cumulative impacts would be less than significant with mitigation and conditions of approval incorporated. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 93 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 Findings of Fact: Based on the analysis of the project’s impacts in the responses to items I through XX, there is no indication that this project will result in substantial adverse effects on human beings. While there will be a variety of temporary adverse effects during construction related to air quality, noise, and traffic, these will be less than significant or reduced to less than significant levels through mitigation. Long term effects include increased vehicular traffic, traffic related noise, and noise from the operation of the project. The analysis herein concludes that direct and indirect environmental effects will, at worst, require mitigation to reduce to less than significant levels. Generally, environmental effects will result in less than significant impacts. Based on the analysis in this Initial Study, direct and indirect impacts to human beings will be less than significant with mitigation incorporation. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 94 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 XXII. EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration as per California Code of Regulations, Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). No earlier analyses were identified for the proposed project. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 95 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 XXIII. APPENDECIES A. Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon). 2020. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study. B. Glen Lukos Associates, Inc.(GLA). 2020. Biological Technical Report. C. Glen Lukos Associates, Inc.(GLA). 2020. Jurisdictional Delineation Report. D. FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS). 2019. Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment. E. Huitt-Zollars. 2020. Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan. F. Huitt-Zollars 2020. Drainage Report for Scott Road. G. Petra Geosciences, Inc. 2018. Due-Diligence/Feasibility Geotechnical Assessment, Tentative Tract No. 32097 and APN 372-190-01, Combined 76-Acre± Vacant Site Located along Lindenberger Road and North of Scott Road, City of Menifee, Riverside County, California. H. Petra Geosciences, Inc. 2018. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment; 76-Acres± of Raw Land North of Scott Road at Lindenberger Road, City of Menifee, Riverside County, California. I. Petra Geosciences, Inc. 2018. Limited Phase II Environmental Soil Residue Survey; 76-Acres± of Raw Land North of Scott Road at Lindenberger Road, City of Menifee, Riverside County, California. J. Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon). 2020. Noise and Vibration Study. K. STC Traffic. 2020. VTTM 37668 Lindenberger Subdivision Traffic Study Report. L. STC Traffic. 2020. Traffic Impact Analysis for VMT. DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 96 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 XXIV. REFERENCES CalRecycle. Identify Disposal Facility Capacity Shortfalls. http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/FacIT/Facility/DisposalGap.aspx (accessed November 2017). ____. 2020. Jurisdiction Disposal and Alternative Daily Cover Tons by Facility. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/DisposalReporting/Destination/DisposalByFacility (accessed January 2020). ____.California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2017. California Emissions Estimator Model User’s Guide Version 2016.3.2. November 2017. ____.California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. Available at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/handbook.pdf. ____. 2015. CA-GREET 2.0 Supplemental Document and Tables of Changes. https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/ca-greet/CA-GREET2-suppdoc-060415.pdf (accessed January 2020). ____. 2017a. 2017 Amendments Health Risk Analysis. ____. 2017b. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. December 14, 2017. https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf. ____. 2018. EMFAC2017 Volume III – Technical Documentation v.1.0.2. July 20, 2018. https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/msei/downloads/emfac2017-volume-iii-technical-documentation.pdf (accessed March 2020). ____.California Department of Finance. 2018. P-1: State Population Projections (2010-2060). January 2018. http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/projections/ (accessed March 2019). ____.California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CALFIRE). 2009. Menifee Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Local Responsibility Area. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5916/menifee.pdf (accessed May 2020). ____.California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). 2020. EnviroStor database. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?myaddress=lindenberger+road+menifee+ca (accessed May 2020). ____.California Energy Commission (CEC). 2018a. Transportation Energy Demand Forecast, 2018- 2030. https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/GetDocument.aspx?tn=223241 (accessed January 2020). ____. 2018b. 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. https://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2019standards/documents/2018_Title_24_2019_Building_Stan dards_FAQ.pdf (accessed January 2020). ____. 2019a. Total System Electric Generation. https://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/electricity_data/total_system_power.html. (accessed January 2020). ____. 2020a. Electricity Consumption by Entity: Southern California Edison. http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbyutil.aspx (accessed January 2020). DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 97 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 ____. 2020b. Natural Gas Consumption by Entity: Southern California Gas Company. https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbyutil.aspx (accessed January 2020). ____.California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). 2020. List of “active” CDO and CAE from Water Board. https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/ (accessed May 2020). ____.Eastern Municipal Water District. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. June 2016. ____. n.d. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. https://www.emwd.org/post/sustainable- groundwater-management-act. (accessed July 2020). ____.Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2014. FEMA Flood Map Service Center. https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?AddressQuery=Lindenberger%20Road%20Menifee#searchre sultsanchor (accessed May 2020). ____.Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. ____.Menifee, City of. 2014. General Plan Safety Element. https://www.cityofmenifee.us/222/Safety- Element (accessed May 2020). ____. 2013. General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report. https://www.cityofmenifee.us/262/Draft- Environmental-Impact-Report (accessed May 2020). ____. 2018. City of Menifee Land Use Map. https://www.cityofmenifee.us/DocumentCenter/View/1013/Menifee-General-Plan-Land-use-map- as-of-May-2018 (accessed May 2020). ____.Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. Available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/air/crnr/notice-adoption-air-toxics-hot-spots-program-guidance-manual- preparation-health-risk-0. ____.Riverside County. 2019. General Plan Safety Element. https://planning.rctlma.org/Portals/14/genplan/2019/elements/Ch06_Safety_080619.pdf (accessed May 2020). ____.Riverside County Sheriff Department, Scott Forbes, Lieutenant, Perris Station/Menifee Police Perris Station. 2020. ____.South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2016. National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) Attainment Status for South Coast Air Basin. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality- management-plans/naaqs-caaqs-feb2016.pdf?sfvrsn=2 (accessed November 2018). ____.Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2016. Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. http://scagrtpscs.net/Documents/2016/final/f2016RTPSCS.pdf (accessed May 2020). DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Tentative Tract Map No. 2019-0012 (TTM 37668) Page 98 W1362-Menifee_(N)_CA; -- 1250593.1 ____.Southern California Gas (SCG). 2016. Gas Transmission Pipeline Interactive Map – Riverside. https://socalgas.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=aaebac8286ea4e4b8e425e 47771b8138 (accessed July 2020). ____.State of California, Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2020. Geotracker Database. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?CMD=runreport&myaddress=Lindenberger+Rd+Men ifee+CA (accessed May 2020). ____.United States Department of Transportation (DOT). 2018. National Transportation Statistics. Accessed February 2019. https://www.bts.gov/topics/national-transportation-statistics (accessed February 2019). ____.United States Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2018. “California - Profile Overview.” Last modified: November 15, 2018. [online]: https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA (accessed February 2019). ____. 2019. California Natural Gas Consumption by End Use. https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_cons_sum_dcu_SCA_a.htm (accessed January 2020). ____.United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). ____. 2018. Exhaust and Crankcase Emission Factors for Nonroad Compression Ignition Engines in MOVES2014b. https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/P100UXEN.txt?ZyActionD=ZyDocument&Client=EPA&Inde x=2016%20Thru%202020&Docs=&Query=&Time=&EndTime=&SearchMethod=1&TocRestrict=n &Toc=&TocEntry=&QField=&QFieldYear=&QFieldMonth=&QFieldDay=&UseQField=&IntQFieldO p=0&ExtQFieldOp=0&XmlQuery=&File=D%3A%5CZYFILES%5CINDEX%20DATA%5C16THRU 20%5CTXT%5C00000008%5CP100UXEN.txt&User=ANONYMOUS&Password=anonymous&So rtMethod=h%7C- &MaximumDocuments=1&FuzzyDegree=0&ImageQuality=r75g8/r75g8/x150y150g16/i425&Displ ay=hpfr&DefSeekPage=x&SearchBack=ZyActionL&Back=ZyActionS&BackDesc=Results%20pag e&MaximumPages=1&ZyEntry=3 (accessed January 2020). ____. 2020. Overview of Greenhouse Gases. https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse- gases (accessed May 2020). DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT “1” Tentative Tract Map No. PLN 19-0012 (Tentative Tract Map No. 37668) Mitigation Monitoring Plan Impact Category Mitigation Measure Implementation Timing Responsible for Implementing Mitigation Responsible for Monitoring Implementation Method of Reporting/ Monitoring Cultural Resources (Section 5) CUL-8 Archeological Work Prior to any grading in the associated area, the Project Applicant shall meet with the project archaeologist and the Consulting Tribe(s) in order to assess Archaeological Site P-33-013299 CA- RIV-007400 to determine boundaries of the site and to determine location for the ESA fencing during the grading activities for site protection. The Consulting Tribe(s) shall work with the Project archaeologist, Project Applicant, the Community Development Director and the grading contractor or appropriate personnel to ensure that a reasonable effort is made to preserve the Archeological Site and inadvertently found features safely to an open space area (anticipated to be on the northwest portion of the project site) and to discuss the most-appropriate methods of relocation. Prior to grading permit issuance Applicant/ Applicant’s Contractor and Project Archeologist Community Development Department Monitoring contracts and Cultural Resources Monitoring Plan (CRMP) Noise (Section XIII) NOI-1 Exterior-to-Interior Noise Level Analysis. For residential units where exterior noise levels exceed 70 dBA CNEL (as shown on Figure 5 of Appendix J), coordinate with the project architects and other contractors to ensure compliance with the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise level standard. This will be achieved through additional exterior-to-interior noise analysis once specific building plan information is available. The information in the analysis should include wall heights and lengths, room volumes, window and door tables typical for a building plan, as well as information on any other openings in the building shell. With this specific building plan information, the analysis should determine the predicted interior noise levels at the planned on-site buildings. If predicted noise levels are found to be in excess of the applicable limit, the report should identify architectural materials or techniques that could be included to reduce noise levels to the applicable limit. Building permits for residential units where noise levels exceed 70 dBA CNEL shall not be issued until the City has confirmed that such residential units include noise reduction techniques to ensure compliance with the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise level standard. Possible noise reduction techniques include: • Windows and sliding glass doors would be mounted in low air infiltration rate frames (0.5 cubic feet per minute or Building Plan Check Applicant/ Applicant’s Contractor Community Development Department Review of Building Plans demonstrating compliance DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 Page 2 of 2 Impact Category Mitigation Measure Implementation Timing Responsible for Implementing Mitigation Responsible for Monitoring Implementation Method of Reporting/ Monitoring less, per ANSI specifications). • Exterior doors would have a solid core with perimeter weather-stripping and threshold seals with a Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of at least 31, with the potential for STC rating of 36 or higher if necessary. • Exterior walls would include minimum of 5/8-inch of stucco or brick veneer over a minimum 1/2-inch plywood or OSB shear panel, R11 insulation and interior 5/8-inch gypsum board. • Walls would have a STC rating of at least 46. • Dual-paned windows would be installed with a STC rating of at least 31, with the potential for STC rating of 36 or higher if necessary. • If exterior sliding glass doors are included, high- performance glazing would be installed with a minimum STC rating of 36. Air conditioning or mechanical ventilation systems would be installed to allow windows and doors to remain closed for extended intervals of time so that acceptable interior noise levels can be maintained. The mechanical ventilation system would meet the criteria of the International Building Code (Chapter 12, Section 1203.3 of the 2001 California Building Code). Tribal Cultural Resources (Section XVIII) CUL-8 Archeological Work Prior to any grading in the associated area, the Project Applicant shall meet with the project archaeologist and the Consulting Tribe(s) in order to assess Archaeological Site P-33-013299 CA- RIV-007400 to determine boundaries of the site and to determine location for the ESA fencing during the grading activities for site protection. The Consulting Tribe(s) shall work with the Project archaeologist, Project Applicant, the Community Development Director and the grading contractor or appropriate personnel to ensure that a reasonable effort is made to preserve the Archeological Site and inadvertently found features safely to an open space area (anticipated to be on the northwest portion of the project site) and to discuss the most-appropriate methods of relocation. Prior to grading permit issuance Applicant/ Applicant’s Contractor and Project Archeologist Community Development Department Monitoring contracts and Cultural Resources Monitoring Plan (CRMP) DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF MENIFEE ) I, Stephanie Roseen, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Menifee, do hereby certify that the foregoing Planning Commission Resolution No. PC20-520 was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Menifee at a meeting thereof held on the 28th day of October 2020 by the following vote: Ayes: Noes: Absent: Abstain: _______________________________ Stephanie Roseen, CMC Deputy City Clerk Karwin, Phillips, Thomas, Diederich, Madrid None None None DocuSign Envelope ID: F3E59FC4-D741-4585-A149-A307EF868E28